[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20150330222847.f255962c.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 22:28:47 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Shaohua Li <shli@...nel.org>, Yalin.Wang@...ymobile.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm: move lazy free pages to inactive list
On Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:45:25 +0900 Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > deactivate_page() doesn't look at or alter PageReferenced(). Should it?
>
> Absolutely true. Thanks.
> Here it goes.
>
> >From 2b2c92eb73a1cceac615b9abd4c0f5f0c3395ff5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>
> Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2015 13:38:46 +0900
> Subject: [PATCH] mm: lru_deactivate_fn should clear PG_referenced
>
> deactivate_page aims for accelerate for reclaiming through
> moving pages from active list to inactive list so we should
> clear PG_referenced for the goal.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/swap.c
> +++ b/mm/swap.c
> @@ -800,6 +800,7 @@ static void lru_deactivate_fn(struct page *page, struct lruvec *lruvec,
>
> del_page_from_lru_list(page, lruvec, lru + LRU_ACTIVE);
> ClearPageActive(page);
> + ClearPageReferenced(page);
> add_page_to_lru_list(page, lruvec, lru);
>
> __count_vm_event(PGDEACTIVATE);
What if we have
PageLRU(page) && !PageActive(page) && PageReferenced(page)
if we really want to "accelerate the reclaim of @page" then we should
clear PG_referenced there too.
(And what about page_referenced(page) :))
--
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