[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20200213185511.4660aca17553562d764dc7ea@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 18:55:11 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: willy@...radead.org, mhocko@...e.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: migrate.c: migrate PG_readahead flag
On Fri, 14 Feb 2020 08:29:45 +0800 Yang Shi <yang.shi@...ux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> Currently migration code doesn't migrate PG_readahead flag.
> Theoretically this would incur slight performance loss as the
> application might have to ramp its readahead back up again. Even though
> such problem happens, it might be hidden by something else since
> migration is typically triggered by compaction and NUMA balancing, any
> of which should be more noticeable.
>
> Migrate the flag after end_page_writeback() since it may clear
> PG_reclaim flag, which is the same bit as PG_readahead, for the new
> page.
>
> --- a/mm/migrate.c
> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
> @@ -647,6 +647,14 @@ void migrate_page_states(struct page *newpage, struct page *page)
> if (PageWriteback(newpage))
> end_page_writeback(newpage);
>
> + /*
> + * PG_readahead share the same bit with PG_reclaim, the above
> + * end_page_writeback() may clear PG_readahead mistakenly, so set
> + * the bit after that.
> + */
> + if (PageReadahead(page))
> + SetPageReadahead(newpage);
> +
> copy_page_owner(page, newpage);
>
Why not
if (PageWriteback(newpage)) {
end_page_writeback(newpage);
/*
* PG_readahead share the same bit with PG_reclaim, the above
* end_page_writeback() may clear PG_readahead mistakenly, so
* set the bit after that.
*/
if (PageReadahead(page))
SetPageReadahead(newpage);
}
?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists