[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200609144551.GA452252@cmpxchg.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2020 10:45:51 -0400
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>
To: Alex Shi <alex.shi@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
iamjoonsoo.kim@....com, linux-mm@...ck.org, mhocko@...e.com,
minchan@...nel.org, mm-commits@...r.kernel.org, riel@...riel.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [patch 113/131] mm: balance LRU lists based on relative thrashing
On Tue, Jun 09, 2020 at 05:15:33PM +0800, Alex Shi wrote:
>
>
> 在 2020/6/4 上午7:03, Andrew Morton 写道:
> >
> > + /* XXX: Move to lru_cache_add() when it supports new vs putback */
>
> Hi Hannes,
>
> Sorry for a bit lost, would you like to explain a bit more of your idea here?
>
> > + spin_lock_irq(&page_pgdat(page)->lru_lock);
> > + lru_note_cost(page);
> > + spin_unlock_irq(&page_pgdat(page)->lru_lock);
> > +
>
>
> What could we see here w/o the lru_lock?
It'll just be part of the existing LRU locking in
pagevec_lru_move_fn(), when the new pages are added to the LRU in
batch. See this older patch for example:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20160606194836.3624-6-hannes@cmpxchg.org/
I didn't include it in this series to reduce conflict with Joonsoo's
WIP series that also operates in this area and does something similar:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/4/3/63
Powered by blists - more mailing lists