From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lee.schermerhorn@hp.com,
kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
eric.whitney@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 15/25] Ramfs and Ram Disk pages are non-reclaimable
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 18:05:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080606180510.87a49e19.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080606202859.408662219@redhat.com>
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 16:28:53 -0400
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> From: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>
>
> Christoph Lameter pointed out that ram disk pages also clutter the
> LRU lists. When vmscan finds them dirty and tries to clean them,
> the ram disk writeback function just redirties the page so that it
> goes back onto the active list. Round and round she goes...
>
> Define new address_space flag [shares address_space flags member
> with mapping's gfp mask] to indicate that the address space contains
> all non-reclaimable pages. This will provide for efficient testing
> of ramdisk pages in page_reclaimable().
>
> Also provide wrapper functions to set/test the noreclaim state to
> minimize #ifdefs in ramdisk driver and any other users of this
> facility.
>
> Set the noreclaim state on address_space structures for new
> ramdisk inodes. Test the noreclaim state in page_reclaimable()
> to cull non-reclaimable pages.
>
> Similarly, ramfs pages are non-reclaimable. Set the 'noreclaim'
> address_space flag for new ramfs inodes.
>
> These changes depend on [CONFIG_]NORECLAIM_LRU.
hm
>
> @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ struct inode *ramfs_get_inode(struct sup
> inode->i_mapping->a_ops = &ramfs_aops;
> inode->i_mapping->backing_dev_info = &ramfs_backing_dev_info;
> mapping_set_gfp_mask(inode->i_mapping, GFP_HIGHUSER);
> + mapping_set_noreclaim(inode->i_mapping);
> inode->i_atime = inode->i_mtime = inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
> switch (mode & S_IFMT) {
> default:
That's OK.
> Index: linux-2.6.26-rc2-mm1/drivers/block/brd.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.26-rc2-mm1.orig/drivers/block/brd.c 2008-05-29 16:21:04.000000000 -0400
> +++ linux-2.6.26-rc2-mm1/drivers/block/brd.c 2008-06-06 16:06:20.000000000 -0400
> @@ -374,8 +374,21 @@ static int brd_ioctl(struct inode *inode
> return error;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * brd_open():
> + * Just mark the mapping as containing non-reclaimable pages
> + */
> +static int brd_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> +{
> + struct address_space *mapping = inode->i_mapping;
> +
> + mapping_set_noreclaim(mapping);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static struct block_device_operations brd_fops = {
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .open = brd_open,
> .ioctl = brd_ioctl,
> #ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_XIP
> .direct_access = brd_direct_access,
But this only works for pagecache in /dev/ramN. afaict the pagecache
for files which are written onto that "blokk device" remain on the LRU.
But that's OK, isn't it? For the ramdisk driver these pages _do_ have
backing store and _can_ be written back and reclaimed, yes?
Still, I'm unsure about the whole implementation. We already maintain
this sort of information in the backing_dev. Would it not be better to
just avoid ever putting such pages onto the LRU in the first place?
Also, I expect there are a whole host of pseudo-filesystems (sysfs?)
which have this problem. Does the patch address all of them? If not,
can we come up with something which _does_ address them all without
having to hunt down and change every such fs?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lee.schermerhorn@hp.com,
kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
eric.whitney@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 15/25] Ramfs and Ram Disk pages are non-reclaimable
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 18:05:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080606180510.87a49e19.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080606202859.408662219@redhat.com>
On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 16:28:53 -0400
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> From: Lee Schermerhorn <Lee.Schermerhorn@hp.com>
>
> Christoph Lameter pointed out that ram disk pages also clutter the
> LRU lists. When vmscan finds them dirty and tries to clean them,
> the ram disk writeback function just redirties the page so that it
> goes back onto the active list. Round and round she goes...
>
> Define new address_space flag [shares address_space flags member
> with mapping's gfp mask] to indicate that the address space contains
> all non-reclaimable pages. This will provide for efficient testing
> of ramdisk pages in page_reclaimable().
>
> Also provide wrapper functions to set/test the noreclaim state to
> minimize #ifdefs in ramdisk driver and any other users of this
> facility.
>
> Set the noreclaim state on address_space structures for new
> ramdisk inodes. Test the noreclaim state in page_reclaimable()
> to cull non-reclaimable pages.
>
> Similarly, ramfs pages are non-reclaimable. Set the 'noreclaim'
> address_space flag for new ramfs inodes.
>
> These changes depend on [CONFIG_]NORECLAIM_LRU.
hm
>
> @@ -61,6 +61,7 @@ struct inode *ramfs_get_inode(struct sup
> inode->i_mapping->a_ops = &ramfs_aops;
> inode->i_mapping->backing_dev_info = &ramfs_backing_dev_info;
> mapping_set_gfp_mask(inode->i_mapping, GFP_HIGHUSER);
> + mapping_set_noreclaim(inode->i_mapping);
> inode->i_atime = inode->i_mtime = inode->i_ctime = CURRENT_TIME;
> switch (mode & S_IFMT) {
> default:
That's OK.
> Index: linux-2.6.26-rc2-mm1/drivers/block/brd.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.26-rc2-mm1.orig/drivers/block/brd.c 2008-05-29 16:21:04.000000000 -0400
> +++ linux-2.6.26-rc2-mm1/drivers/block/brd.c 2008-06-06 16:06:20.000000000 -0400
> @@ -374,8 +374,21 @@ static int brd_ioctl(struct inode *inode
> return error;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * brd_open():
> + * Just mark the mapping as containing non-reclaimable pages
> + */
> +static int brd_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
> +{
> + struct address_space *mapping = inode->i_mapping;
> +
> + mapping_set_noreclaim(mapping);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static struct block_device_operations brd_fops = {
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .open = brd_open,
> .ioctl = brd_ioctl,
> #ifdef CONFIG_BLK_DEV_XIP
> .direct_access = brd_direct_access,
But this only works for pagecache in /dev/ramN. afaict the pagecache
for files which are written onto that "blokk device" remain on the LRU.
But that's OK, isn't it? For the ramdisk driver these pages _do_ have
backing store and _can_ be written back and reclaimed, yes?
Still, I'm unsure about the whole implementation. We already maintain
this sort of information in the backing_dev. Would it not be better to
just avoid ever putting such pages onto the LRU in the first place?
Also, I expect there are a whole host of pseudo-filesystems (sysfs?)
which have this problem. Does the patch address all of them? If not,
can we come up with something which _does_ address them all without
having to hunt down and change every such fs?
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-07 1:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 151+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-06 20:28 [PATCH -mm 00/25] VM pageout scalability improvements (V10) Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 01/25] move isolate_lru_page() to vmscan.c Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 02/25] Use an indexed array for LRU variables Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-07 5:43 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-07 14:47 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-08 11:22 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-07 18:42 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 03/25] use an array for the LRU pagevecs Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 04/25] free swap space on swap-in/activation Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-07 19:56 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-09 2:14 ` MinChan Kim
2008-06-09 2:42 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-09 13:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-10 2:30 ` MinChan Kim
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 05/25] define page_file_cache() function Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-07 23:38 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 06/25] split LRU lists into anon & file sets Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-07 1:22 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:52 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 07/25] second chance replacement for anonymous pages Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-07 6:03 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-07 6:43 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 15:04 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 08/25] add some sanity checks to get_scan_ratio Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 15:11 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 09/25] fix pagecache reclaim referenced bit check Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-07 1:08 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-08 10:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 10/25] add newly swapped in pages to the inactive list Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:04 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 11/25] more aggressively use lumpy reclaim Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:05 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 12/25] pageflag helpers for configed-out flags Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 13/25] Noreclaim LRU Infrastructure Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:05 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-07 1:05 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 20:34 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-08 20:34 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-08 20:57 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 20:57 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 21:32 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-08 21:32 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-08 21:43 ` Ray Lee
2008-06-08 21:43 ` Ray Lee
2008-06-08 23:22 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 23:22 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 23:34 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-08 23:34 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-08 23:54 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 23:54 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-09 0:56 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-09 0:56 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-09 6:10 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-09 6:10 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-09 13:44 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-09 13:44 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-09 2:58 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-09 2:58 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-09 5:44 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-09 5:44 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-10 19:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-10 19:17 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-10 19:37 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-10 19:37 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-10 21:33 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-10 21:33 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-10 21:48 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-10 21:48 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-10 22:05 ` Dave Hansen
2008-06-10 22:05 ` Dave Hansen
2008-06-11 5:09 ` Paul Mundt
2008-06-11 5:09 ` Paul Mundt
2008-06-11 6:16 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-11 6:16 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-11 6:29 ` Paul Mundt
2008-06-11 6:29 ` Paul Mundt
2008-06-11 12:06 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-11 12:06 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-11 14:09 ` Removing node flags from page->flags was Re: [PATCH -mm 13/25] Noreclaim LRU Infrastructure II Andi Kleen
2008-06-11 14:09 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-11 19:03 ` [PATCH -mm 13/25] Noreclaim LRU Infrastructure Andy Whitcroft
2008-06-11 19:03 ` Andy Whitcroft
2008-06-11 20:52 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-11 20:52 ` Andi Kleen
2008-06-11 23:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-11 23:25 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-08 22:03 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-08 22:03 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-08 21:07 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-08 21:07 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-10 20:09 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-10 20:09 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 14/25] Noreclaim LRU Page Statistics Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 15/25] Ramfs and Ram Disk pages are non-reclaimable Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:05 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2008-06-07 1:05 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-08 4:32 ` Greg KH
2008-06-08 4:32 ` Greg KH
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 16/25] SHM_LOCKED " Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:05 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-07 5:21 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-10 21:03 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-10 21:22 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-06-10 21:49 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 17/25] Mlocked Pages " Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-07 1:07 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-07 1:07 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-07 5:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-07 5:38 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2008-06-10 3:31 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-10 3:31 ` Nick Piggin
2008-06-10 12:50 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-10 12:50 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-10 21:14 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-10 21:14 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-10 21:43 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-06-10 21:43 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-06-10 21:57 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-10 21:57 ` Andrew Morton
2008-06-11 16:01 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-06-11 16:01 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-06-10 23:48 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-10 23:48 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-11 15:29 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-06-11 15:29 ` Lee Schermerhorn
2008-06-11 1:00 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-11 1:00 ` Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 18/25] Downgrade mmap sem while populating mlocked regions Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 19/25] Handle mlocked pages during map, remap, unmap Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 20/25] Mlocked Pages statistics Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` [PATCH -mm 21/25] Cull non-reclaimable pages in fault path Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:28 ` Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel, Lee Schermerhorn
2008-06-06 20:29 ` [PATCH -mm 22/25] Noreclaim and Mlocked pages vm events Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:29 ` [PATCH -mm 23/25] Noreclaim LRU scan sysctl Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:29 ` Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel, Lee Schermerhorn
2008-06-06 20:29 ` [PATCH -mm 24/25] Mlocked Pages: count attempts to free mlocked page Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:29 ` [PATCH -mm 25/25] Noreclaim LRU and Mlocked Pages Documentation Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 20:29 ` Rik van Riel, Rik van Riel
2008-06-06 21:02 ` [PATCH -mm 00/25] VM pageout scalability improvements (V10) Andrew Morton
2008-06-06 21:08 ` Rik van Riel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080606180510.87a49e19.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=eric.whitney@hp.com \
--cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=lee.schermerhorn@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.