From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Ming Ling <ming.ling@spreadtrum.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net,
vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com,
rientjes@google.com, hughd@google.com,
kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, riel@redhat.com,
mgorman@suse.de, aquini@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
orson.zhai@spreadtrum.com, geng.ren@spreadtrum.com,
chunyan.zhang@spreadtrum.com, zhizhou.tian@spreadtrum.com,
yuming.han@spreadtrum.com, xiajing@spreadst.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: exclude isolated non-lru pages from NR_ISOLATED_ANON or NR_ISOLATED_FILE.
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 08:06:18 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161016230618.GB9196@bbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161015071044.GC9949@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Hi Michal,
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 09:10:45AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 15-10-16 00:26:33, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> > > index 0409a4ad6ea1..6584705a46f6 100644
> > > --- a/mm/compaction.c
> > > +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> > > @@ -685,7 +685,8 @@ static bool too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone)
> > > */
> > > static unsigned long
> > > isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,
> > > - unsigned long end_pfn, isolate_mode_t isolate_mode)
> > > + unsigned long end_pfn, isolate_mode_t isolate_mode,
> > > + unsigned long *isolated_file, unsigned long *isolated_anon)
> > > {
> > > struct zone *zone = cc->zone;
> > > unsigned long nr_scanned = 0, nr_isolated = 0;
> > > @@ -866,6 +867,10 @@ isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,
> > >
> > > /* Successfully isolated */
> > > del_page_from_lru_list(page, lruvec, page_lru(page));
> > > + if (page_is_file_cache(page))
> > > + (*isolated_file)++;
> > > + else
> > > + (*isolated_anon)++;
> > >
> > > isolate_success:
> > > list_add(&page->lru, &cc->migratepages);
> > >
> > > Makes more sense?
> >
> > It is doable for isolation part. IOW, maybe we can make acct_isolated
> > simple with those counters but we need to handle migrate, putback part.
> > If you want to remove the check of __PageMoable with those counter, it
> > means we should pass the counter on every functions related migration
> > where isolate, migrate, putback parts.
>
> OK, I see. Can we just get rid of acct_isolated altogether? Why cannot
> we simply update NR_ISOLATED_* while isolating pages? Just looking at
> isolate_migratepages_block:
> acct_isolated(zone, cc);
> putback_movable_pages(&cc->migratepages);
>
> suggests we are doing something suboptimal. I guess we cannot get rid of
> __PageMoveble checks which is sad because that just adds a lot of
> confusion because checking for !__PageMovable(page) for LRU pages is
> just a head scratcher (LRU pages are movable arent' they?). Maybe it
> would be even good to get rid of this misnomer. PageNonLRUMovable?
Yeah, I hated the naming but didn't have a good idea.
PageNonLRUMovable, definitely, one I thought as candidate but dropped
by lenghthy naming. If others don't object, I am happy to change it.
>
> Anyway, I would suggest to do something like this. Batching NR_ISOLATED*
> just doesn't make all that much sense as these are per-cpu and the
> resulting code seems to be easier without it.
Agree. Could you resend it as formal patch?
> ---
> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> index 0409a4ad6ea1..df1fd0c20e5c 100644
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -634,22 +634,6 @@ isolate_freepages_range(struct compact_control *cc,
> return pfn;
> }
>
> -/* Update the number of anon and file isolated pages in the zone */
> -static void acct_isolated(struct zone *zone, struct compact_control *cc)
> -{
> - struct page *page;
> - unsigned int count[2] = { 0, };
> -
> - if (list_empty(&cc->migratepages))
> - return;
> -
> - list_for_each_entry(page, &cc->migratepages, lru)
> - count[!!page_is_file_cache(page)]++;
> -
> - mod_node_page_state(zone->zone_pgdat, NR_ISOLATED_ANON, count[0]);
> - mod_node_page_state(zone->zone_pgdat, NR_ISOLATED_FILE, count[1]);
> -}
> -
> /* Similar to reclaim, but different enough that they don't share logic */
> static bool too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone)
> {
> @@ -866,6 +850,8 @@ isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,
>
> /* Successfully isolated */
> del_page_from_lru_list(page, lruvec, page_lru(page));
> + inc_node_page_state(zone->zone_pgdat,
> + NR_ISOLATED_ANON + page_is_file_cache(page));
>
> isolate_success:
> list_add(&page->lru, &cc->migratepages);
> @@ -902,7 +888,6 @@ isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(zone_lru_lock(zone), flags);
> locked = false;
> }
> - acct_isolated(zone, cc);
> putback_movable_pages(&cc->migratepages);
> cc->nr_migratepages = 0;
> cc->last_migrated_pfn = 0;
> @@ -988,7 +973,6 @@ isolate_migratepages_range(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long start_pfn,
> if (cc->nr_migratepages == COMPACT_CLUSTER_MAX)
> break;
> }
> - acct_isolated(cc->zone, cc);
>
> return pfn;
> }
> @@ -1258,10 +1242,8 @@ static isolate_migrate_t isolate_migratepages(struct zone *zone,
> low_pfn = isolate_migratepages_block(cc, low_pfn,
> block_end_pfn, isolate_mode);
>
> - if (!low_pfn || cc->contended) {
> - acct_isolated(zone, cc);
> + if (!low_pfn || cc->contended)
> return ISOLATE_ABORT;
> - }
>
> /*
> * Either we isolated something and proceed with migration. Or
> @@ -1271,7 +1253,6 @@ static isolate_migrate_t isolate_migratepages(struct zone *zone,
> break;
> }
>
> - acct_isolated(zone, cc);
> /* Record where migration scanner will be restarted. */
> cc->migrate_pfn = low_pfn;
>
> diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
> index 99250aee1ac1..66ce6b490b13 100644
> --- a/mm/migrate.c
> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
> @@ -168,8 +168,6 @@ void putback_movable_pages(struct list_head *l)
> continue;
> }
> list_del(&page->lru);
> - dec_node_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> - page_is_file_cache(page));
> /*
> * We isolated non-lru movable page so here we can use
> * __PageMovable because LRU page's mapping cannot have
> @@ -186,6 +184,8 @@ void putback_movable_pages(struct list_head *l)
> put_page(page);
> } else {
> putback_lru_page(page);
> + dec_node_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> + page_is_file_cache(page));
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -1121,8 +1121,15 @@ static ICE_noinline int unmap_and_move(new_page_t get_new_page,
> * restored.
> */
> list_del(&page->lru);
> - dec_node_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> - page_is_file_cache(page));
> +
> + /*
> + * Compaction can migrate also non-LRU pages which are
> + * not accounted to NR_ISOLATED_*. They can be recognized
> + * as __PageMovable
> + */
> + if (likely(!__PageMovable(page)))
> + dec_node_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> + page_is_file_cache(page));
> }
>
> /*
>
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
--
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: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Ming Ling <ming.ling@spreadtrum.com>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net,
vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com,
rientjes@google.com, hughd@google.com,
kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, riel@redhat.com,
mgorman@suse.de, aquini@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
orson.zhai@spreadtrum.com, geng.ren@spreadtrum.com,
chunyan.zhang@spreadtrum.com, zhizhou.tian@spreadtrum.com,
yuming.han@spreadtrum.com, xiajing@spreadst.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: exclude isolated non-lru pages from NR_ISOLATED_ANON or NR_ISOLATED_FILE.
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 08:06:18 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161016230618.GB9196@bbox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161015071044.GC9949@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Hi Michal,
On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 09:10:45AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 15-10-16 00:26:33, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> > > index 0409a4ad6ea1..6584705a46f6 100644
> > > --- a/mm/compaction.c
> > > +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> > > @@ -685,7 +685,8 @@ static bool too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone)
> > > */
> > > static unsigned long
> > > isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,
> > > - unsigned long end_pfn, isolate_mode_t isolate_mode)
> > > + unsigned long end_pfn, isolate_mode_t isolate_mode,
> > > + unsigned long *isolated_file, unsigned long *isolated_anon)
> > > {
> > > struct zone *zone = cc->zone;
> > > unsigned long nr_scanned = 0, nr_isolated = 0;
> > > @@ -866,6 +867,10 @@ isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,
> > >
> > > /* Successfully isolated */
> > > del_page_from_lru_list(page, lruvec, page_lru(page));
> > > + if (page_is_file_cache(page))
> > > + (*isolated_file)++;
> > > + else
> > > + (*isolated_anon)++;
> > >
> > > isolate_success:
> > > list_add(&page->lru, &cc->migratepages);
> > >
> > > Makes more sense?
> >
> > It is doable for isolation part. IOW, maybe we can make acct_isolated
> > simple with those counters but we need to handle migrate, putback part.
> > If you want to remove the check of __PageMoable with those counter, it
> > means we should pass the counter on every functions related migration
> > where isolate, migrate, putback parts.
>
> OK, I see. Can we just get rid of acct_isolated altogether? Why cannot
> we simply update NR_ISOLATED_* while isolating pages? Just looking at
> isolate_migratepages_block:
> acct_isolated(zone, cc);
> putback_movable_pages(&cc->migratepages);
>
> suggests we are doing something suboptimal. I guess we cannot get rid of
> __PageMoveble checks which is sad because that just adds a lot of
> confusion because checking for !__PageMovable(page) for LRU pages is
> just a head scratcher (LRU pages are movable arent' they?). Maybe it
> would be even good to get rid of this misnomer. PageNonLRUMovable?
Yeah, I hated the naming but didn't have a good idea.
PageNonLRUMovable, definitely, one I thought as candidate but dropped
by lenghthy naming. If others don't object, I am happy to change it.
>
> Anyway, I would suggest to do something like this. Batching NR_ISOLATED*
> just doesn't make all that much sense as these are per-cpu and the
> resulting code seems to be easier without it.
Agree. Could you resend it as formal patch?
> ---
> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> index 0409a4ad6ea1..df1fd0c20e5c 100644
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -634,22 +634,6 @@ isolate_freepages_range(struct compact_control *cc,
> return pfn;
> }
>
> -/* Update the number of anon and file isolated pages in the zone */
> -static void acct_isolated(struct zone *zone, struct compact_control *cc)
> -{
> - struct page *page;
> - unsigned int count[2] = { 0, };
> -
> - if (list_empty(&cc->migratepages))
> - return;
> -
> - list_for_each_entry(page, &cc->migratepages, lru)
> - count[!!page_is_file_cache(page)]++;
> -
> - mod_node_page_state(zone->zone_pgdat, NR_ISOLATED_ANON, count[0]);
> - mod_node_page_state(zone->zone_pgdat, NR_ISOLATED_FILE, count[1]);
> -}
> -
> /* Similar to reclaim, but different enough that they don't share logic */
> static bool too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone)
> {
> @@ -866,6 +850,8 @@ isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,
>
> /* Successfully isolated */
> del_page_from_lru_list(page, lruvec, page_lru(page));
> + inc_node_page_state(zone->zone_pgdat,
> + NR_ISOLATED_ANON + page_is_file_cache(page));
>
> isolate_success:
> list_add(&page->lru, &cc->migratepages);
> @@ -902,7 +888,6 @@ isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(zone_lru_lock(zone), flags);
> locked = false;
> }
> - acct_isolated(zone, cc);
> putback_movable_pages(&cc->migratepages);
> cc->nr_migratepages = 0;
> cc->last_migrated_pfn = 0;
> @@ -988,7 +973,6 @@ isolate_migratepages_range(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long start_pfn,
> if (cc->nr_migratepages == COMPACT_CLUSTER_MAX)
> break;
> }
> - acct_isolated(cc->zone, cc);
>
> return pfn;
> }
> @@ -1258,10 +1242,8 @@ static isolate_migrate_t isolate_migratepages(struct zone *zone,
> low_pfn = isolate_migratepages_block(cc, low_pfn,
> block_end_pfn, isolate_mode);
>
> - if (!low_pfn || cc->contended) {
> - acct_isolated(zone, cc);
> + if (!low_pfn || cc->contended)
> return ISOLATE_ABORT;
> - }
>
> /*
> * Either we isolated something and proceed with migration. Or
> @@ -1271,7 +1253,6 @@ static isolate_migrate_t isolate_migratepages(struct zone *zone,
> break;
> }
>
> - acct_isolated(zone, cc);
> /* Record where migration scanner will be restarted. */
> cc->migrate_pfn = low_pfn;
>
> diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
> index 99250aee1ac1..66ce6b490b13 100644
> --- a/mm/migrate.c
> +++ b/mm/migrate.c
> @@ -168,8 +168,6 @@ void putback_movable_pages(struct list_head *l)
> continue;
> }
> list_del(&page->lru);
> - dec_node_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> - page_is_file_cache(page));
> /*
> * We isolated non-lru movable page so here we can use
> * __PageMovable because LRU page's mapping cannot have
> @@ -186,6 +184,8 @@ void putback_movable_pages(struct list_head *l)
> put_page(page);
> } else {
> putback_lru_page(page);
> + dec_node_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> + page_is_file_cache(page));
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -1121,8 +1121,15 @@ static ICE_noinline int unmap_and_move(new_page_t get_new_page,
> * restored.
> */
> list_del(&page->lru);
> - dec_node_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> - page_is_file_cache(page));
> +
> + /*
> + * Compaction can migrate also non-LRU pages which are
> + * not accounted to NR_ISOLATED_*. They can be recognized
> + * as __PageMovable
> + */
> + if (likely(!__PageMovable(page)))
> + dec_node_page_state(page, NR_ISOLATED_ANON +
> + page_is_file_cache(page));
> }
>
> /*
>
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-16 23:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-13 6:39 [PATCH v2] mm: exclude isolated non-lru pages from NR_ISOLATED_ANON or NR_ISOLATED_FILE ming.ling
2016-10-13 6:39 ` ming.ling
2016-10-13 8:09 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-13 8:09 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-14 8:32 ` Ming Ling
2016-10-14 8:32 ` Ming Ling
2016-10-14 11:30 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-14 11:30 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-14 13:46 ` Minchan Kim
2016-10-14 13:46 ` Minchan Kim
2016-10-14 13:53 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-14 13:53 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-14 14:44 ` Minchan Kim
2016-10-14 14:44 ` Minchan Kim
2016-10-14 15:03 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-14 15:03 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-14 15:26 ` Minchan Kim
2016-10-14 15:26 ` Minchan Kim
2016-10-15 7:10 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-15 7:10 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-16 23:06 ` Minchan Kim [this message]
2016-10-16 23:06 ` Minchan Kim
2016-10-17 8:42 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-17 8:42 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-17 11:10 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-17 11:10 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-18 6:29 ` Minchan Kim
2016-10-18 6:29 ` Minchan Kim
2016-10-18 12:52 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-18 12:52 ` Michal Hocko
2016-10-19 2:32 ` Ming Ling
2016-10-19 2:32 ` Ming Ling
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=20161016230618.GB9196@bbox \
--to=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aquini@redhat.com \
--cc=baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com \
--cc=chunyan.zhang@spreadtrum.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=geng.ren@spreadtrum.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=ming.ling@spreadtrum.com \
--cc=orson.zhai@spreadtrum.com \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=xiajing@spreadst.com \
--cc=yuming.han@spreadtrum.com \
--cc=zhizhou.tian@spreadtrum.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.