All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Wang Sheng-Hui <crosslonelyover@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
	a.gruenbacher@computer.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2010 04:06:32 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C427DC8.6020504@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C425273.5000702@gmail.com>

Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The comment for struct shrinker in include/linux/mm.h says
> "shrink...It should return the number of objects which remain in the
> cache."
> Please notice the word "remain".
>
> In fs/mbcache.h, mb_cache_shrink_fn is used as the shrink function:
>  	static struct shrinker mb_cache_shrinker = {	
>  		.shrink = mb_cache_shrink_fn,
>  		.seeks = DEFAULT_SEEKS,
>  	};
> In mb_cache_shrink_fn, the return value for nr_to_scan > 0 is the
> number of mb_cache_entry before shrink operation. It may because the
> memory usage for mbcache is low, so the effect is not so obvious.
> I think we'd better fix the return value issue.
>
> Following patch is against 2.6.35-rc5. Please check it.
>
>   
you are right that it's not returning the remaining entries, but I think
we can do this more simply; there isn't any reason to calculate it twice
How about just moving the accounting to the end, since "count" isn't actually
used when freeing, anyway.... something like this?

diff --git a/fs/mbcache.c b/fs/mbcache.c
index ec88ff3..3af79de 100644
--- a/fs/mbcache.c
+++ b/fs/mbcache.c
@@ -203,19 +203,11 @@ mb_cache_shrink_fn(int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
 	struct list_head *l, *ltmp;
 	int count = 0;
 
-	spin_lock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
-	list_for_each(l, &mb_cache_list) {
-		struct mb_cache *cache -			list_entry(l, struct mb_cache, c_cache_list);
-		mb_debug("cache %s (%d)", cache->c_name,
-			  atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count));
-		count += atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count);
-	}
 	mb_debug("trying to free %d entries", nr_to_scan);
-	if (nr_to_scan = 0) {
-		spin_unlock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
+	if (nr_to_scan = 0)
 		goto out;
-	}
+
+	spin_lock &mb_cache_spinlock);
 	while (nr_to_scan-- && !list_empty(&mb_cache_lru_list)) {
 		struct mb_cache_entry *ce  			list_entry(mb_cache_lru_list.next,
@@ -229,6 +221,17 @@ mb_cache_shrink_fn(int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
 						   e_lru_list), gfp_mask);
 	}
 out:
+	/* Count remaining entries */
+	spin_lock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
+	list_for_each(l, &mb_cache_list) {
+		struct mb_cache *cache +			list_entry(l, struct mb_cache, c_cache_list);
+		mb_debug("cache %s (%d)", cache->c_name,
+			  atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count));
+		count += atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count);
+	}
+	spin_unlock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
+
 	return (count / 100) * sysctl_vfs_cache_pressure;
 }
 


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Wang Sheng-Hui <crosslonelyover@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
	a.gruenbacher@computer.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:06:32 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C427DC8.6020504@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C425273.5000702@gmail.com>

Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The comment for struct shrinker in include/linux/mm.h says
> "shrink...It should return the number of objects which remain in the
> cache."
> Please notice the word "remain".
>
> In fs/mbcache.h, mb_cache_shrink_fn is used as the shrink function:
>  	static struct shrinker mb_cache_shrinker = {	
>  		.shrink = mb_cache_shrink_fn,
>  		.seeks = DEFAULT_SEEKS,
>  	};
> In mb_cache_shrink_fn, the return value for nr_to_scan > 0 is the
> number of mb_cache_entry before shrink operation. It may because the
> memory usage for mbcache is low, so the effect is not so obvious.
> I think we'd better fix the return value issue.
>
> Following patch is against 2.6.35-rc5. Please check it.
>
>   
you are right that it's not returning the remaining entries, but I think
we can do this more simply; there isn't any reason to calculate it twice
How about just moving the accounting to the end, since "count" isn't actually
used when freeing, anyway.... something like this?

diff --git a/fs/mbcache.c b/fs/mbcache.c
index ec88ff3..3af79de 100644
--- a/fs/mbcache.c
+++ b/fs/mbcache.c
@@ -203,19 +203,11 @@ mb_cache_shrink_fn(int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
 	struct list_head *l, *ltmp;
 	int count = 0;
 
-	spin_lock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
-	list_for_each(l, &mb_cache_list) {
-		struct mb_cache *cache =
-			list_entry(l, struct mb_cache, c_cache_list);
-		mb_debug("cache %s (%d)", cache->c_name,
-			  atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count));
-		count += atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count);
-	}
 	mb_debug("trying to free %d entries", nr_to_scan);
-	if (nr_to_scan == 0) {
-		spin_unlock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
+	if (nr_to_scan == 0)
 		goto out;
-	}
+
+	spin_lock &mb_cache_spinlock);
 	while (nr_to_scan-- && !list_empty(&mb_cache_lru_list)) {
 		struct mb_cache_entry *ce =
 			list_entry(mb_cache_lru_list.next,
@@ -229,6 +221,17 @@ mb_cache_shrink_fn(int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
 						   e_lru_list), gfp_mask);
 	}
 out:
+	/* Count remaining entries */
+	spin_lock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
+	list_for_each(l, &mb_cache_list) {
+		struct mb_cache *cache =
+			list_entry(l, struct mb_cache, c_cache_list);
+		mb_debug("cache %s (%d)", cache->c_name,
+			  atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count));
+		count += atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count);
+	}
+	spin_unlock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
+
 	return (count / 100) * sysctl_vfs_cache_pressure;
 }
 


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@redhat.com>
To: Wang Sheng-Hui <crosslonelyover@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
	kernel-janitors <kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
	a.gruenbacher@computer.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2010 23:06:32 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C427DC8.6020504@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C425273.5000702@gmail.com>

Wang Sheng-Hui wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The comment for struct shrinker in include/linux/mm.h says
> "shrink...It should return the number of objects which remain in the
> cache."
> Please notice the word "remain".
>
> In fs/mbcache.h, mb_cache_shrink_fn is used as the shrink function:
>  	static struct shrinker mb_cache_shrinker = {	
>  		.shrink = mb_cache_shrink_fn,
>  		.seeks = DEFAULT_SEEKS,
>  	};
> In mb_cache_shrink_fn, the return value for nr_to_scan > 0 is the
> number of mb_cache_entry before shrink operation. It may because the
> memory usage for mbcache is low, so the effect is not so obvious.
> I think we'd better fix the return value issue.
>
> Following patch is against 2.6.35-rc5. Please check it.
>
>   
you are right that it's not returning the remaining entries, but I think
we can do this more simply; there isn't any reason to calculate it twice
How about just moving the accounting to the end, since "count" isn't actually
used when freeing, anyway.... something like this?

diff --git a/fs/mbcache.c b/fs/mbcache.c
index ec88ff3..3af79de 100644
--- a/fs/mbcache.c
+++ b/fs/mbcache.c
@@ -203,19 +203,11 @@ mb_cache_shrink_fn(int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
 	struct list_head *l, *ltmp;
 	int count = 0;
 
-	spin_lock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
-	list_for_each(l, &mb_cache_list) {
-		struct mb_cache *cache =
-			list_entry(l, struct mb_cache, c_cache_list);
-		mb_debug("cache %s (%d)", cache->c_name,
-			  atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count));
-		count += atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count);
-	}
 	mb_debug("trying to free %d entries", nr_to_scan);
-	if (nr_to_scan == 0) {
-		spin_unlock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
+	if (nr_to_scan == 0)
 		goto out;
-	}
+
+	spin_lock &mb_cache_spinlock);
 	while (nr_to_scan-- && !list_empty(&mb_cache_lru_list)) {
 		struct mb_cache_entry *ce =
 			list_entry(mb_cache_lru_list.next,
@@ -229,6 +221,17 @@ mb_cache_shrink_fn(int nr_to_scan, gfp_t gfp_mask)
 						   e_lru_list), gfp_mask);
 	}
 out:
+	/* Count remaining entries */
+	spin_lock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
+	list_for_each(l, &mb_cache_list) {
+		struct mb_cache *cache =
+			list_entry(l, struct mb_cache, c_cache_list);
+		mb_debug("cache %s (%d)", cache->c_name,
+			  atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count));
+		count += atomic_read(&cache->c_entry_count);
+	}
+	spin_unlock(&mb_cache_spinlock);
+
 	return (count / 100) * sysctl_vfs_cache_pressure;
 }
 

--
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>

  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-18  4:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-18  1:01 [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-18  1:01 ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0 Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-18  1:01 ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-18  4:06 ` Eric Sandeen [this message]
2010-07-18  4:06   ` Eric Sandeen
2010-07-18  4:06   ` Eric Sandeen
2010-07-18  6:01   ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-18  6:01     ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0 Christoph Hellwig
2010-07-18  6:36     ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-18  6:36       ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0 Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-18  6:36       ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-19 18:39       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-19 18:39         ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-20  1:02         ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > shenghui
2010-07-20  1:02           ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0 shenghui
2010-07-20  1:04           ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > shenghui
2010-07-20  1:04             ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0 shenghui
2010-07-20  1:04             ` shenghui
2010-07-20 15:13         ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan Eric Sandeen
2010-07-20 15:13           ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0 Eric Sandeen
2010-07-20 16:34           ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-20 16:34             ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-20 16:34             ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-19 18:40       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-19 18:40         ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-21 10:53 ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-21 10:53   ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0 Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-21 10:53   ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-21 10:53   ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-21 14:00   ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan Eric Sandeen
2010-07-21 14:00     ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0 Eric Sandeen
2010-07-21 14:00     ` Eric Sandeen
2010-07-19 16:19     ` [PATCH 1/2] mbcache: Remove unused features Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-19 16:19       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-19 16:19       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-21 23:18       ` Andreas Dilger
2010-07-22  0:07         ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-21 17:44     ` [PATCH 2/2] mbcache: fix shrinker function return value Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-21 17:44       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-21 17:44       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-21 17:57     ` [PATCH 0/2] mbcache fixes Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-21 17:57       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-21 17:57       ` Andreas Gruenbacher
2010-07-21 23:22       ` Al Viro
2010-07-21 23:22         ` Al Viro
2010-07-21 23:22         ` Al Viro
2010-07-22  0:54 ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-22  0:54   ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0 Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-22  0:54   ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-22  0:54   ` Wang Sheng-Hui
2010-07-22  1:06   ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > shenghui
2010-07-22  1:06     ` [PATCH] fix return value for mb_cache_shrink_fn when nr_to_scan > 0 shenghui
2010-07-22  1:06     ` shenghui
2010-07-22  1:06     ` shenghui

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=4C427DC8.6020504@redhat.com \
    --to=sandeen@redhat.com \
    --cc=a.gruenbacher@computer.org \
    --cc=crosslonelyover@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    /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.