From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@suse.de,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [v5][PATCH 5/6] mm: vmscan: batch shrink_page_list() locking operations
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 15:59:30 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130604065930.GA26129@blaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51AD84BA.4090106@sr71.net>
On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 11:10:02PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 06/03/2013 10:01 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >> > +static int __remove_mapping_batch(struct list_head *remove_list,
> >> > + struct list_head *ret_pages,
> >> > + struct list_head *free_pages)
> >> > +{
> >> > + int nr_reclaimed = 0;
> >> > + struct address_space *mapping;
> >> > + struct page *page;
> >> > + LIST_HEAD(need_free_mapping);
> >> > +
> >> > + while (!list_empty(remove_list)) {
> ...
> >> > + if (!__remove_mapping(mapping, page)) {
> >> > + unlock_page(page);
> >> > + list_add(&page->lru, ret_pages);
> >> > + continue;
> >> > + }
> >> > + list_add(&page->lru, &need_free_mapping);
> ...
> > + spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
> > + while (!list_empty(&need_free_mapping)) {...
> > + list_move(&page->list, free_pages);
> > + mapping_release_page(mapping, page);
> > + }
> > Why do we need new lru list instead of using @free_pages?
>
> I actually tried using @free_pages at first. The problem is that we
> need to call mapping_release_page() without the radix tree lock held so
> we can not do it in the first while() loop.
>
> 'free_pages' is a list created up in shrink_page_list(). There can be
> several calls to __remove_mapping_batch() for each call to
> shrink_page_list().
I missed that point.
>
> 'need_free_mapping' lets us temporarily differentiate the pages that we
> need to call mapping_release_page()/unlock_page() on versus the ones on
> 'free_pages' which have already had that done.
>
Right.
> We could theoretically delay _all_ of the
> release_mapping_page()/unlock_page() operations until the _entire_
> shrink_page_list() operation is done, but doing this really helps with
maybe you mean
but doing this doesn't really helps
> lock_page() latency.
>
> Does that make sense?
If so, It does make sense.
Thanks for pointing me out.
>
> --
> 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>
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
--
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>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Dave Hansen <dave@sr71.net>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@suse.de,
tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [v5][PATCH 5/6] mm: vmscan: batch shrink_page_list() locking operations
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 15:59:30 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130604065930.GA26129@blaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51AD84BA.4090106@sr71.net>
On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 11:10:02PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 06/03/2013 10:01 PM, Minchan Kim wrote:
> >> > +static int __remove_mapping_batch(struct list_head *remove_list,
> >> > + struct list_head *ret_pages,
> >> > + struct list_head *free_pages)
> >> > +{
> >> > + int nr_reclaimed = 0;
> >> > + struct address_space *mapping;
> >> > + struct page *page;
> >> > + LIST_HEAD(need_free_mapping);
> >> > +
> >> > + while (!list_empty(remove_list)) {
> ...
> >> > + if (!__remove_mapping(mapping, page)) {
> >> > + unlock_page(page);
> >> > + list_add(&page->lru, ret_pages);
> >> > + continue;
> >> > + }
> >> > + list_add(&page->lru, &need_free_mapping);
> ...
> > + spin_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
> > + while (!list_empty(&need_free_mapping)) {...
> > + list_move(&page->list, free_pages);
> > + mapping_release_page(mapping, page);
> > + }
> > Why do we need new lru list instead of using @free_pages?
>
> I actually tried using @free_pages at first. The problem is that we
> need to call mapping_release_page() without the radix tree lock held so
> we can not do it in the first while() loop.
>
> 'free_pages' is a list created up in shrink_page_list(). There can be
> several calls to __remove_mapping_batch() for each call to
> shrink_page_list().
I missed that point.
>
> 'need_free_mapping' lets us temporarily differentiate the pages that we
> need to call mapping_release_page()/unlock_page() on versus the ones on
> 'free_pages' which have already had that done.
>
Right.
> We could theoretically delay _all_ of the
> release_mapping_page()/unlock_page() operations until the _entire_
> shrink_page_list() operation is done, but doing this really helps with
maybe you mean
but doing this doesn't really helps
> lock_page() latency.
>
> Does that make sense?
If so, It does make sense.
Thanks for pointing me out.
>
> --
> 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>
--
Kind regards,
Minchan Kim
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-04 6:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-03 20:02 [v5][PATCH 0/6] mm: vmscan: Batch page reclamation under shink_page_list Dave Hansen
2013-06-03 20:02 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-03 20:02 ` [v5][PATCH 1/6] mm: swap: defer clearing of page_private() for swap cache pages Dave Hansen
2013-06-03 20:02 ` Dave Hansen
2013-07-14 23:47 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-07-14 23:47 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-06-03 20:02 ` [v5][PATCH 2/6] mm: swap: make 'struct page' and swp_entry_t variants of swapcache_free() Dave Hansen
2013-06-03 20:02 ` Dave Hansen
2013-07-14 23:48 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-07-14 23:48 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-06-03 20:02 ` [v5][PATCH 3/6] mm: vmscan: break up __remove_mapping() Dave Hansen
2013-06-03 20:02 ` Dave Hansen
2013-07-14 23:49 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-07-14 23:49 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-06-03 20:02 ` [v5][PATCH 4/6] mm: vmscan: break out mapping "freepage" code Dave Hansen
2013-06-03 20:02 ` Dave Hansen
2013-07-14 23:49 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-07-14 23:49 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-06-03 20:02 ` [v5][PATCH 5/6] mm: vmscan: batch shrink_page_list() locking operations Dave Hansen
2013-06-03 20:02 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 1:17 ` Hillf Danton
2013-06-04 1:17 ` Hillf Danton
2013-06-04 5:07 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 5:07 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 15:22 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 15:22 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-05 7:28 ` Hillf Danton
2013-06-05 7:28 ` Hillf Danton
2013-06-05 7:57 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-05 7:57 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-05 14:24 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-05 14:24 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 5:01 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 5:01 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 6:02 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 6:02 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 15:29 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 15:29 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 23:32 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 23:32 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 6:10 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 6:10 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 6:59 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2013-06-04 6:59 ` Minchan Kim
2013-07-14 23:50 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-07-14 23:50 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-06-03 20:02 ` [v5][PATCH 6/6] mm: vmscan: drain batch list during long operations Dave Hansen
2013-06-03 20:02 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 6:05 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 6:05 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 15:24 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 15:24 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 23:23 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 23:23 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 23:31 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 23:31 ` Dave Hansen
2013-06-04 23:36 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 23:36 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 23:37 ` Minchan Kim
2013-06-04 23:37 ` Minchan Kim
2013-07-14 23:51 ` Wanpeng Li
2013-07-14 23:51 ` Wanpeng Li
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=20130604065930.GA26129@blaptop \
--to=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dave@sr71.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.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.