[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2a97ce77-42c8-15ea-50c4-fc18fd7fe693@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2022 11:07:29 +0800
From: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
To: "ying.huang@...el.com" <ying.huang@...el.com>
CC: <songmuchun@...edance.com>, <hch@...radead.org>,
<willy@...radead.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] mm/vmscan: add a comment about MADV_FREE pages
check in folio_check_dirty_writeback
On 2022/4/11 19:50, ying.huang@...el.com wrote:
> On Sat, 2022-04-09 at 17:34 +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> The MADV_FREE pages check in folio_check_dirty_writeback is a bit hard to
>> follow. Add a comment to make the code clear.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Huang, Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> mm/vmscan.c | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
>> index c77d5052f230..4a76be47bed1 100644
>> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
>> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
>> @@ -1436,6 +1436,9 @@ static void folio_check_dirty_writeback(struct folio
>> *folio,
>> /*
>> * Anonymous pages are not handled by flushers and must be written
>> * from reclaim context. Do not stall reclaim based on them
>> + * MADV_FREE anonymous pages are put into inactive file list too.
>> + * They could be mistakenly treated as file lru. So further anon
>> + * test is needed.
>> */
>
> How about something as follows,
>
> /*
> * Anonymous pages (including MADV_FREE ones) are not handled
> by * flushers and must be written from reclaim context. Do not stall
> * reclaim based on them
> */.
>
This comment looks good but it seems it doesn't explain the MADV_FREE check logic.
Is this already enough? If so, will change to use this. Thanks!
> Best Regards,
> Huang, Ying
>
>> if (!folio_is_file_lru(folio) ||
>> (folio_test_anon(folio) && !folio_test_swapbacked(folio))) {
>
>
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists