[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190806134853.GB15167@google.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 09:48:53 -0400
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Brendan Gregg <bgregg@...flix.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Christian Hansen <chansen3@...co.com>, dancol@...gle.com,
fmayer@...gle.com, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, kernel-team@...roid.com,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>, minchan@...nel.org,
namhyung@...gle.com, paulmck@...ux.ibm.com,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>, surenb@...gle.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, tkjos@...gle.com,
Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov.dev@...il.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] page_idle: Drain all LRU pagevec before idle
tracking
On Tue, Aug 06, 2019 at 01:44:02PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
[snip]
> > > > This operation even if expensive is only done once during the access of the
> > > > page_idle file. Did you have a better fix in mind?
> > >
> > > Can we set the idle bit also for non-lru pages as long as they are
> > > reachable via pte?
> >
> > Not at the moment with the current page idle tracking code. PageLRU(page)
> > flag is checked in page_idle_get_page().
>
> yes, I am aware of the current code. I strongly suspect that the PageLRU
> check was there to not mark arbitrary page looked up by pfn with the
> idle bit because that would be unexpected. But I might be easily wrong
> here.
Yes, quite possible.
> > Even if we could set it for non-LRU, the idle bit (page flag) would not be
> > cleared if page is not on LRU because page-reclaim code (page_referenced() I
> > believe) would not clear it.
>
> Yes, it is either reclaim when checking references as you say but also
> mark_page_accessed. I believe the later might still have the page on the
> pcp LRU add cache. Maybe I am missing something something but it seems
> that there is nothing fundamentally requiring the user mapped page to be
> on the LRU list when seting the idle bit.
>
> That being said, your big hammer approach will work more reliable but if
> you do not feel like changing the underlying PageLRU assumption then
> document that draining should be removed longterm.
Yes, at the moment I am in preference of keeping the underlying assumption
same. I am Ok with adding of a comment on the drain call that it is to be
removed longterm.
thanks,
- Joel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists