From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, willy@infradead.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: + vmscan-convert-the-writeback-handling-in-shrink_page_list-to-folios.patch added to mm-unstable branch
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 13:10:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220429201017.43181C385A4@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
The patch titled
Subject: vmscan: convert the writeback handling in shrink_page_list() to folios
has been added to the -mm mm-unstable branch. Its filename is
vmscan-convert-the-writeback-handling-in-shrink_page_list-to-folios.patch
This patch should soon appear in the mm-unstable branch at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next via the mm-everything
branch at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
and is updated there every 2-3 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: vmscan: convert the writeback handling in shrink_page_list() to folios
Slightly more efficient due to fewer calls to compound_head().
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220429192329.3034378-6-willy@infradead.org
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
mm/vmscan.c | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
--- a/mm/vmscan.c~vmscan-convert-the-writeback-handling-in-shrink_page_list-to-folios
+++ a/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1598,40 +1598,42 @@ retry:
stat->nr_congested += nr_pages;
/*
- * If a page at the tail of the LRU is under writeback, there
+ * If a folio at the tail of the LRU is under writeback, there
* are three cases to consider.
*
- * 1) If reclaim is encountering an excessive number of pages
- * under writeback and this page is both under writeback and
- * PageReclaim then it indicates that pages are being queued
- * for IO but are being recycled through the LRU before the
- * IO can complete. Waiting on the page itself risks an
- * indefinite stall if it is impossible to writeback the
- * page due to IO error or disconnected storage so instead
- * note that the LRU is being scanned too quickly and the
- * caller can stall after page list has been processed.
- *
- * 2) Global or new memcg reclaim encounters a page that is
+ * 1) If reclaim is encountering an excessive number of folios
+ * under writeback and this folio is both under
+ * writeback and has the reclaim flag set then it
+ * indicates that folios are being queued for I/O but
+ * are being recycled through the LRU before the I/O
+ * can complete. Waiting on the folio itself risks an
+ * indefinite stall if it is impossible to writeback
+ * the folio due to I/O error or disconnected storage
+ * so instead note that the LRU is being scanned too
+ * quickly and the caller can stall after the folio
+ * list has been processed.
+ #
+ * 2) Global or new memcg reclaim encounters a folio that is
* not marked for immediate reclaim, or the caller does not
* have __GFP_FS (or __GFP_IO if it's simply going to swap,
- * not to fs). In this case mark the page for immediate
+ * not to fs). In this case mark the folio for immediate
* reclaim and continue scanning.
*
* Require may_enter_fs() because we would wait on fs, which
- * may not have submitted IO yet. And the loop driver might
- * enter reclaim, and deadlock if it waits on a page for
+ * may not have submitted I/O yet. And the loop driver might
+ * enter reclaim, and deadlock if it waits on a folio for
* which it is needed to do the write (loop masks off
* __GFP_IO|__GFP_FS for this reason); but more thought
* would probably show more reasons.
*
- * 3) Legacy memcg encounters a page that is already marked
- * PageReclaim. memcg does not have any dirty pages
+ * 3) Legacy memcg encounters a folio that already has the
+ * reclaim flag set. memcg does not have any dirty folio
* throttling so we could easily OOM just because too many
- * pages are in writeback and there is nothing else to
+ * folios are in writeback and there is nothing else to
* reclaim. Wait for the writeback to complete.
*
- * In cases 1) and 2) we activate the pages to get them out of
- * the way while we continue scanning for clean pages on the
+ * In cases 1) and 2) we activate the folios to get them out of
+ * the way while we continue scanning for clean folios on the
* inactive list and refilling from the active list. The
* observation here is that waiting for disk writes is more
* expensive than potentially causing reloads down the line.
@@ -1639,7 +1641,7 @@ retry:
* memory pressure on the cache working set any longer than it
* takes to write them to disk.
*/
- if (PageWriteback(page)) {
+ if (folio_test_writeback(folio)) {
/* Case 1 above */
if (current_is_kswapd() &&
PageReclaim(page) &&
@@ -1649,28 +1651,32 @@ retry:
/* Case 2 above */
} else if (writeback_throttling_sane(sc) ||
- !PageReclaim(page) || !may_enter_fs(page, sc->gfp_mask)) {
+ !folio_test_reclaim(folio) ||
+ !may_enter_fs(page, sc->gfp_mask)) {
/*
- * This is slightly racy - end_page_writeback()
- * might have just cleared PageReclaim, then
- * setting PageReclaim here end up interpreted
- * as PageReadahead - but that does not matter
- * enough to care. What we do want is for this
- * page to have PageReclaim set next time memcg
- * reclaim reaches the tests above, so it will
- * then wait_on_page_writeback() to avoid OOM;
- * and it's also appropriate in global reclaim.
+ * This is slightly racy -
+ * folio_end_writeback() might have just
+ * cleared the reclaim flag, then setting
+ * reclaim here ends up interpreted as
+ * the readahead flag - but that does
+ * not matter enough to care. What we
+ * do want is for this folio to have
+ * the reclaim flag set next time memcg
+ * reclaim reaches the tests above, so
+ * it will then folio_wait_writeback()
+ * to avoid OOM; and it's also appropriate
+ * in global reclaim.
*/
- SetPageReclaim(page);
+ folio_set_reclaim(folio);
stat->nr_writeback += nr_pages;
goto activate_locked;
/* Case 3 above */
} else {
- unlock_page(page);
- wait_on_page_writeback(page);
- /* then go back and try same page again */
- list_add_tail(&page->lru, page_list);
+ folio_unlock(folio);
+ folio_wait_writeback(folio);
+ /* then go back and try same folio again */
+ list_add_tail(&folio->lru, page_list);
continue;
}
}
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from willy@infradead.org are
shmem-convert-shmem_alloc_hugepage-to-use-vma_alloc_folio.patch
mm-huge_memory-convert-do_huge_pmd_anonymous_page-to-use-vma_alloc_folio.patch
mm-remove-alloc_pages_vma.patch
vmscan-use-folio_mapped-in-shrink_page_list.patch
vmscan-convert-the-writeback-handling-in-shrink_page_list-to-folios.patch
swap-turn-get_swap_page-into-folio_alloc_swap.patch
swap-convert-add_to_swap-to-take-a-folio.patch
vmscan-convert-dirty-page-handling-to-folios.patch
vmscan-convert-page-buffer-handling-to-use-folios.patch
vmscan-convert-lazy-freeing-to-folios.patch
vmscan-move-initialisation-of-mapping-down.patch
vmscan-convert-the-activate_locked-portion-of-shrink_page_list-to-folios.patch
vmscan-remove-remaining-uses-of-page-in-shrink_page_list.patch
mm-shmem-use-a-folio-in-shmem_unused_huge_shrink.patch
mm-swap-add-folio_throttle_swaprate.patch
mm-shmem-convert-shmem_add_to_page_cache-to-take-a-folio.patch
mm-shmem-turn-shmem_should_replace_page-into-shmem_should_replace_folio.patch
mm-shmem-turn-shmem_alloc_page-into-shmem_alloc_folio.patch
mm-shmem-convert-shmem_alloc_and_acct_page-to-use-a-folio.patch
mm-shmem-convert-shmem_getpage_gfp-to-use-a-folio.patch
mm-shmem-convert-shmem_swapin_page-to-shmem_swapin_folio.patch
vmcore-convert-copy_oldmem_page-to-take-an-iov_iter.patch
vmcore-convert-__read_vmcore-to-use-an-iov_iter.patch
vmcore-convert-read_from_oldmem-to-take-an-iov_iter.patch
next reply other threads:[~2022-04-29 20:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-29 20:10 Andrew Morton [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-05-06 1:32 + vmscan-convert-the-writeback-handling-in-shrink_page_list-to-folios.patch added to mm-unstable branch Andrew Morton
2022-05-10 15:47 ` Matthew Wilcox
2022-05-10 17:44 ` Andrew Morton
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=20220429201017.43181C385A4@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mm-commits@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/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.