[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20100325180726.6C89.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 18:09:34 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>,
Adam Litke <agl@...ibm.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/11] mm,migration: Do not try to migrate unmapped anonymous pages
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 08:32:35 +0000
> Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 11:49:23AM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 03:21:41PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > > Hmmm...
> > > I haven't understand your mention because I guess I was wrong.
> > >
> > > probably my last question was unclear. I mean,
> > >
> > > 1) If we still need SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU, why do we need to add refcount?
> > > Which difference is exist between normal page migration and compaction?
> >
> > The processes typically calling migration today own the page they are moving
> > and is not going to exit unexpectedly during migration.
> >
> > > 2) If we added refcount, which race will solve?
> > >
> >
> > The process exiting and the last anon_vma being dropped while compaction
> > is running. This can be reliably triggered with compaction.
> >
> > > IOW, Is this patch fix old issue or compaction specific issue?
> > >
> >
> > Strictly speaking, it's an old issue but in practice it's impossible to
> > trigger because the process migrating always owns the page. Compaction
> > moves pages belonging to arbitrary processes.
> >
> Kosaki-san,
>
> IIUC, the race in memory-hotunplug was fixed by this patch [2/11].
>
> But, this behavior of unmap_and_move() requires access to _freed_
> objects (spinlock). Even if it's safe because of SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU,
> it't not good habit in general.
>
> After direct compaction, page-migration will be one of "core" code of
> memory management. Then, I agree to patch [1/11] as our direction for
> keeping sanity and showing direction to more updates. Maybe adding
> refcnt and removing RCU in futuer is good.
But Christoph seems oppose to remove SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU. then refcount
is meaningless now. I agree you if we will remove SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU
in the future.
refcount is easy understanding than rcu trick.
> IMHO, pushing this patch [2/11] as "BUGFIX" independent of this set and
> adding anon_vma->refcnt [1/11] and [3/11] in 1st Direct-compaction patch
> series to show the direction will makse sense.
> (I think merging 1/11 and 3/11 will be okay...)
agreed.
>
> Thanks,
> -Kame
>
>
--
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