[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87wnbggbqa.fsf@yhuang6-desk2.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 08:53:49 +0800
From: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Minchan Kim <minchan@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@...temov.name>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: Remember young/dirty bit for page migrations
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 04:40:12PM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
[snip]
>
>> I don't find pte_dirty() is synced to PageDirty() as in
>> try_to_migrate_one(). Is it a issue in the original code?
>
> I think it has? There is:
>
> /* Set the dirty flag on the folio now the pte is gone. */
> if (pte_dirty(pteval))
> folio_mark_dirty(folio);
>
Sorry, my original words are confusing. Yes, there's dirty bit syncing
in try_to_migrate_one(). But I don't find that in migrate_device.c
$ grep dirty mm/migrate_device.c
if (pte_soft_dirty(pte))
swp_pte = pte_swp_mksoft_dirty(swp_pte);
if (pte_swp_soft_dirty(pte))
swp_pte = pte_swp_mksoft_dirty(swp_pte);
entry = pte_mkwrite(pte_mkdirty(entry));
I guess that migrate_device.c is used to migrate between CPU visible
page to CPU un-visible page (device visible), so the rule is different?
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
Powered by blists - more mailing lists