[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5554C854.6020900@suse.cz>
Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 18:07:48 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>
CC: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
Steve Capper <steve.capper@...aro.org>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
Jerome Marchand <jmarchan@...hat.com>,
Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 02/28] rmap: add argument to charge compound page
On 04/23/2015 11:03 PM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> We're going to allow mapping of individual 4k pages of THP compound
> page. It means we cannot rely on PageTransHuge() check to decide if
> map/unmap small page or THP.
>
> The patch adds new argument to rmap functions to indicate whether we want
> to operate on whole compound page or only the small page.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>
> Tested-by: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
But I wonder about one thing:
> -void page_remove_rmap(struct page *page)
> +void page_remove_rmap(struct page *page, bool compound)
> {
> + int nr = compound ? hpage_nr_pages(page) : 1;
> +
> if (!PageAnon(page)) {
> + VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(compound && !PageHuge(page), page);
> page_remove_file_rmap(page);
> return;
> }
The function continues by:
/* page still mapped by someone else? */
if (!atomic_add_negative(-1, &page->_mapcount))
return;
/* Hugepages are not counted in NR_ANON_PAGES for now. */
if (unlikely(PageHuge(page)))
return;
The handling of compound parameter for PageHuge() pages feels just
weird. You use hpage_nr_pages() for them which tests PageTransHuge(). It
doesn't break anything and the value of nr is effectively ignored
anyway, but still...
So I wonder, if all callers of page_remove_rmap() for PageHuge() pages
are the two in mm/hugetlb.c, why not just create a special case
function? Or are some callers elsewhere, not aware whether they are
calling this on a PageHuge()? So compound might be even false for those?
If that's all possible and legal, then maybe explain it in a comment to
reduce confusion of further readers. And move the 'nr' assignment to a
place where we are sure it's not a PageHuge(), i.e. right above the
place the value is used, perhaps?
> @@ -1181,11 +1191,12 @@ void page_remove_rmap(struct page *page)
> * these counters are not modified in interrupt context, and
> * pte lock(a spinlock) is held, which implies preemption disabled.
> */
> - if (PageTransHuge(page))
> + if (compound) {
> + VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!PageTransHuge(page), page);
> __dec_zone_page_state(page, NR_ANON_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGES);
> + }
>
> - __mod_zone_page_state(page_zone(page), NR_ANON_PAGES,
> - -hpage_nr_pages(page));
> + __mod_zone_page_state(page_zone(page), NR_ANON_PAGES, -nr);
>
> if (unlikely(PageMlocked(page)))
> clear_page_mlock(page);
> @@ -1327,7 +1338,7 @@ static int try_to_unmap_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> dec_mm_counter(mm, MM_FILEPAGES);
>
> discard:
> - page_remove_rmap(page);
> + page_remove_rmap(page, false);
> page_cache_release(page);
>
> out_unmap:
--
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