From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch][v2] swap: virtual swap readahead
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 15:27:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090603132751.GA1813@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090602233457.GY1065@one.firstfloor.org>
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 01:34:57AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 12:37:39AM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > + *
> > + * Caller must hold down_read on the vma->vm_mm if vma is not NULL.
> > + */
> > +struct page *swapin_readahead(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > + struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long start, pos, end;
> > + unsigned long pmin, pmax;
> > + int cluster, window;
> > +
> > + if (!vma || !vma->vm_mm) /* XXX: shmem case */
> > + return swapin_readahead_phys(entry, gfp_mask, vma, addr);
> > +
> > + cluster = 1 << page_cluster;
> > + window = cluster << PAGE_SHIFT;
> > +
> > + /* Physical range to read from */
> > + pmin = swp_offset(entry) & ~(cluster - 1);
>
> Is cluster really properly sign extended on 64bit? Looks a little
> dubious. long from the start would be safer
Fixed.
> > + /* Virtual range to read from */
> > + start = addr & ~(window - 1);
>
> Same.
Fixed.
> > + pgd = pgd_offset(vma->vm_mm, pos);
> > + if (!pgd_present(*pgd))
> > + continue;
> > + pud = pud_offset(pgd, pos);
> > + if (!pud_present(*pud))
> > + continue;
> > + pmd = pmd_offset(pud, pos);
> > + if (!pmd_present(*pmd))
> > + continue;
> > + pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, pmd, pos, &ptl);
>
> You could be more efficient here by using the standard mm/* nested loop
> pattern that avoids relookup of everything in each iteration. I suppose
> it would mainly make a difference with 32bit highpte where mapping a pte
> can be somewhat costly. And you would take less locks this way.
I ran into weird problems here. The above version is actually faster
in the benchmarks than writing a nested level walker or using
walk_page_range(). Still digging but it can take some time. Busy
week :(
> > + page = read_swap_cache_async(swp, gfp_mask, vma, pos);
> > + if (!page)
> > + continue;
>
> That's out of memory, break would be better here because prefetch
> while oom is usually harmful.
It can also happen due to a race with something releasing the swap
slot (i.e. swap_duplicate() fails). But the old version did a break
too and this patch shouldn't do it differently. Fixed.
> > + page_cache_release(page);
> > + }
> > + lru_add_drain(); /* Push any new pages onto the LRU now */
> > + return read_swap_cache_async(entry, gfp_mask, vma, addr);
>
> Shouldn't that page be already handled in the loop earlier? Why doing that
> again? It would be better to remember it from there.
When doing the nested page table level walker, communicating even more
state back and forth gets pretty ugly. I see what I can do.
Thanks for your input Andi,
Hannes
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Hugh Dickins <hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch][v2] swap: virtual swap readahead
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2009 15:27:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090603132751.GA1813@cmpxchg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090602233457.GY1065@one.firstfloor.org>
On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 01:34:57AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 12:37:39AM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > + *
> > + * Caller must hold down_read on the vma->vm_mm if vma is not NULL.
> > + */
> > +struct page *swapin_readahead(swp_entry_t entry, gfp_t gfp_mask,
> > + struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr)
> > +{
> > + unsigned long start, pos, end;
> > + unsigned long pmin, pmax;
> > + int cluster, window;
> > +
> > + if (!vma || !vma->vm_mm) /* XXX: shmem case */
> > + return swapin_readahead_phys(entry, gfp_mask, vma, addr);
> > +
> > + cluster = 1 << page_cluster;
> > + window = cluster << PAGE_SHIFT;
> > +
> > + /* Physical range to read from */
> > + pmin = swp_offset(entry) & ~(cluster - 1);
>
> Is cluster really properly sign extended on 64bit? Looks a little
> dubious. long from the start would be safer
Fixed.
> > + /* Virtual range to read from */
> > + start = addr & ~(window - 1);
>
> Same.
Fixed.
> > + pgd = pgd_offset(vma->vm_mm, pos);
> > + if (!pgd_present(*pgd))
> > + continue;
> > + pud = pud_offset(pgd, pos);
> > + if (!pud_present(*pud))
> > + continue;
> > + pmd = pmd_offset(pud, pos);
> > + if (!pmd_present(*pmd))
> > + continue;
> > + pte = pte_offset_map_lock(vma->vm_mm, pmd, pos, &ptl);
>
> You could be more efficient here by using the standard mm/* nested loop
> pattern that avoids relookup of everything in each iteration. I suppose
> it would mainly make a difference with 32bit highpte where mapping a pte
> can be somewhat costly. And you would take less locks this way.
I ran into weird problems here. The above version is actually faster
in the benchmarks than writing a nested level walker or using
walk_page_range(). Still digging but it can take some time. Busy
week :(
> > + page = read_swap_cache_async(swp, gfp_mask, vma, pos);
> > + if (!page)
> > + continue;
>
> That's out of memory, break would be better here because prefetch
> while oom is usually harmful.
It can also happen due to a race with something releasing the swap
slot (i.e. swap_duplicate() fails). But the old version did a break
too and this patch shouldn't do it differently. Fixed.
> > + page_cache_release(page);
> > + }
> > + lru_add_drain(); /* Push any new pages onto the LRU now */
> > + return read_swap_cache_async(entry, gfp_mask, vma, addr);
>
> Shouldn't that page be already handled in the loop earlier? Why doing that
> again? It would be better to remember it from there.
When doing the nested page table level walker, communicating even more
state back and forth gets pretty ugly. I see what I can do.
Thanks for your input Andi,
Hannes
--
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:[~2009-06-03 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-02 22:37 [patch][v2] swap: virtual swap readahead Johannes Weiner
2009-06-02 22:37 ` Johannes Weiner
2009-06-02 23:34 ` Andi Kleen
2009-06-02 23:34 ` Andi Kleen
2009-06-03 13:27 ` Johannes Weiner [this message]
2009-06-03 13:27 ` Johannes Weiner
2009-06-03 14:51 ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-03 14:51 ` Rik van Riel
2009-06-03 15:02 ` Andi Kleen
2009-06-03 15:02 ` Andi Kleen
2009-06-05 11:03 ` Minchan Kim
2009-06-05 11:03 ` Minchan Kim
2009-06-04 1:46 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-04 1:46 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-06-04 10:04 ` Johannes Weiner
2009-06-04 10:04 ` Johannes Weiner
2009-06-07 17:55 ` Hugh Dickins
2009-06-08 15:21 ` Johannes Weiner
2009-06-08 15:21 ` Johannes Weiner
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=20090603132751.GA1813@cmpxchg.org \
--to=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=hugh.dickins@tiscali.co.uk \
--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.