linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 05/14] mm: multi-gen LRU: groundwork

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOUHufYPT3-_5sAX9r0hyZz4As79FKnVP=gOT=weFdYje0bR5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Mar 2022 03:04:22 -0600
From:   Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
To:     Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Aneesh Kumar <aneesh.kumar@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@...a.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
        Jesse Barnes <jsbarnes@...gle.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
        Michael Larabel <Michael@...haellarabel.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        Ying Huang <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        LAK <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Kernel Page Reclaim v2 <page-reclaim@...gle.com>,
        x86 <x86@...nel.org>, Brian Geffon <bgeffon@...gle.com>,
        Jan Alexander Steffens <heftig@...hlinux.org>,
        Oleksandr Natalenko <oleksandr@...alenko.name>,
        Steven Barrett <steven@...uorix.net>,
        Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
        Daniel Byrne <djbyrne@....edu>,
        Donald Carr <d@...os-reins.com>,
        Holger Hoffstätte <holger@...lied-asynchrony.com>,
        Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@...dex.ru>,
        Shuang Zhai <szhai2@...rochester.edu>,
        Sofia Trinh <sofia.trinh@....works>,
        Vaibhav Jain <vaibhav@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 05/14] mm: multi-gen LRU: groundwork

On Wed, Mar 16, 2022 at 5:25 PM Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com> wrote:
>
...
> > +static inline bool lru_gen_add_folio(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio, bool reclaiming)
> > +{
> > +       int gen;
> > +       unsigned long old_flags, new_flags;
> > +       int type = folio_is_file_lru(folio);
> > +       int zone = folio_zonenum(folio);
> > +       struct lru_gen_struct *lrugen = &lruvec->lrugen;
> > +
> > +       if (folio_test_unevictable(folio))
> > +               return false;
> > +       /*
> > +        * There are three common cases for this page:
> > +        * 1. If it's hot, e.g., freshly faulted in or previously hot and
> > +        *    migrated, add it to the youngest generation.
>
> usually, one page is not active when it is faulted in. till its second
> access is detected, it can be active.

The active/inactive LRU *assumes* this; MGLRU *assumes* the opposite,
and there is no "active" in MGLRU -- we call it hot to avoid confusion
:)

> > +        * 2. If it's cold but can't be evicted immediately, i.e., an anon page
> > +        *    not in swapcache or a dirty page pending writeback, add it to the
> > +        *    second oldest generation.
> > +        * 3. Everything else (clean, cold) is added to the oldest generation.
> > +        */
...
> > +#define LRU_GEN_MASK           ((BIT(LRU_GEN_WIDTH) - 1) << LRU_GEN_PGOFF)
> > +#define LRU_REFS_MASK          ((BIT(LRU_REFS_WIDTH) - 1) << LRU_REFS_PGOFF)
>
> The commit log said nothing about REFS flags and tiers.
> but the code is here. either the commit log lacks something
> or the code should belong to the next patch?

It did:
  A few macros, i.e., LRU_REFS_*, used later are added in this patch
to make the patchset less diffy.

> > @@ -462,6 +462,11 @@ void folio_add_lru(struct folio *folio)
> >         VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_active(folio) && folio_test_unevictable(folio), folio);
> >         VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_lru(folio), folio);
> >
> > +       /* see the comment in lru_gen_add_folio() */
> > +       if (lru_gen_enabled() && !folio_test_unevictable(folio) &&
> > +           lru_gen_in_fault() && !(current->flags & PF_MEMALLOC))
> > +               folio_set_active(folio);
>
> So here is our magic to make folio active as long as it is
> faulted in? i really don't think the below comment is good,
> could we say our purpose directly and explicitly?
>
>  /* see the comment in lru_gen_add_folio() */

I generally keep comments in a few major locations and reference them
from many other minior locations so that it's easier to manage in the
long run. It is a hassle for reviews but once in the tree you can jump
to lru_gen_add_folio() with ctags/cscope or find all places that
reference it by grepping. Assuming we state the purpose, which is to
make lru_gen_add_folio() add the page to the youngest generation, you
still want to go to lru_gen_add_folio() to check if this is really the
case. So why bother :)