Message-ID: <20090722165202.GA8937@random.random>
Date:	Wed, 22 Jul 2009 18:52:03 +0200
From:	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>
To:	Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@...cali.co.uk>
Cc:	Izik Eidus <ieidus@...hat.com>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	chrisw@...hat.com, avi@...hat.com, riel@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	nickpiggin@...oo.com.au, Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] ksm: identify PageKsm pages

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 01:45:15PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
> If they're to be vm_normal_page pages (I think we'll agree they are),
> then for now they have to be counted either as file pages or as anon
> pages.  We could trawl through mm/ adding the third category for KSM
> pages, but I don't think that would be sensible - KSM is mostly
> keeping out of everybody's way, and I want to preserve that.

That was basically the idea, keeping out of everybody's way. This was
more true in the past than today, I mean back when CONFIG_KSM=m was
allowed.. Today instead KSM is more like CONFIG_SWAP, which is surely
nice from the standpoint that it should be always available and I like
that.

> swapping these pages we will use a PAGE_MAPPING_KSM bit 2 (set in
> addition to PAGE_MAPPING_ANON), so that the pointer in page->mapping

Ok if it was my choice I wouldn't make them Anon pages.

My background is that in theory, and from a madvise API standpoint,
Ksm could work on more than Anon pages in the future.

Example is when pagecache is enabled in host to provide the same
pre-cache feature that tmem provides to Xen. We already have that
pre-cache of tmem since day zero in KVM (in fact we only more recently
had a way to switch it off and do zerocopy DMA with O_DIRECT, kind of
turning off tmem).

So it wouldn't be impossible to have a shared pre-cache even when we
don't share the same parent qcow2 image, but that is purely
theoretical, and it likely never happen. So I am ok with considering
ksm pages as anon...

For swap we'll need to sue a new bitflag there and adjust PageAnon to
check against &(PAGE_MAPPING_ANON|PAGE_MAPPING_KSM)!=0, which will
have the same runtime cost, so no problem there.

> But I'd still expect them to be PageAnon: even more so, really -
> once they're swapping, they're even more ordinary anonymous pages.

Frankly the fact they swap on swap device, doesn't make them more
anonymous the same way /dev/shm files are filebacked and they swap to
swap device too.

> Leave them out of such accounting completely, or give them their
> own stats: yes, that can be done, but not without changes elsewhere;
> which I think we'd prefer not to press until KSM is a more accepted
> part of regular mm operation.

Ok.

> That's certainly the ugliest part of accepting PageKsm pages as
> PageAnon, and I wept when I realized we needed that check (well,
> I exaggerate a little ;).

Yes, that very change is exactly what actually made me to rewind back
to the issue of why Ksm pages provides benefit to be Anon pages too.

> It didn't cross my mind to move it into reuse_swap_page(): yes,
> we could do that.  I don't see how it's safer; and to be honest,

I thought it was safer, because reuse_swap_page is the thing that tell
us if we can takeover an anon page and avoid COW. So anybody calling
reuse_swap_page should first check if it's a Ksm page outside of it,
and not takeover in that case. Ksm pages must always be readonly to
avoid screwing stable tree lookups (stable tree is never regenerated
and we need it to stay stable). The swapin path right now doesn't
require the check because we know Ksm pages won't come in from swap
but I thought it was safer to have reuse_swap_page to be aware instead
of leaving the job to the caller. Not that it makes much difference.

> its main appeal to me is that it would hide this wart away more,
> where fewer eyes would notice it.  Which may not be the best
> argument for making the move!  Technically, I think it would
> just increase the overhead of COWing a KSM page (getting that
> page lock, maybe having to drop ptlock etc.), but that may not
> matter much: please persuade me it's safer in reuse_swap_page()
> and I'll move it there.

Yes it increases overhead a bit, but Ksm pages are never locked so the
difference in overhead is negligeable. It's up to you...

Ack 6/10 too..
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists