[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100805141706.GB2985@barrios-desktop>
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 23:17:06 +0900
From: Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@...il.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] vmscan: synchrounous lumpy reclaim use lock_page()
instead trylock_page()
On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 03:13:39PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> When synchrounous lumpy reclaim, there is no reason to give up to
> reclaim pages even if page is locked. We use lock_page() instead
> trylock_page() in this case.
>
> Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
> ---
> mm/vmscan.c | 4 +++-
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> index 1cdc3db..833b6ad 100644
> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> @@ -665,7 +665,9 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list,
> page = lru_to_page(page_list);
> list_del(&page->lru);
>
> - if (!trylock_page(page))
> + if (sync_writeback == PAGEOUT_IO_SYNC)
> + lock_page(page);
> + else if (!trylock_page(page))
> goto keep;
>
> VM_BUG_ON(PageActive(page));
> --
> 1.6.5.2
>
>
>
Hmm. We can make sure lumpy already doesn't select the page locked?
I mean below scenario.
LRU head -> page A -> page B -> LRU tail
lock_page(page A)
some_function()
direct reclaim
select victim page B
enter lumpy mode
select victim page A as well as page B
shrink_page_list
lock_page(page A)
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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