From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7CECCC433EF for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 20:36:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1346531AbiDNUik (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2022 16:38:40 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54312 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1346471AbiDNUig (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2022 16:38:36 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd2c.google.com (mail-io1-xd2c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A0E6EBAEF for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 13:36:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd2c.google.com with SMTP id x4so6643312iop.7 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 13:36:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=VOwb/LIajkynds1NOWj0jp1Wh/dVLVu/LuQcUbDz8pc=; b=Fl/3pmZMMXpOUXW9mpvpX/dnQQ8iA+BLm4Msn7syrUbuGNt6ScyDa/OeLqypvbAZD3 mn/YqmGq1kRjD8kCuAkSd7Rl/xsRv9+bu/uYkJZYO6ztOmnXAmlF/Um+oHvfq8CBWlG8 nmo2fZO/3i/n8sBlau9jKc8ktVdxUIL6KfVQt1UTGh6oKY3BuxQRcBomVOMM5T+JSRpZ G0XFcWIeCNOiY9mH6ebjC64b+MRHtWCr1HGLIEb9kbrQnYiAAybYpZVzGbnl8gaqCwCk 4N7JMm/Zuv+rdDf+LtmAAt0BOUCUoOUGMh0tFQTPiieWZn2K8CxtWysktqjJtG83yiFW kv1A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=VOwb/LIajkynds1NOWj0jp1Wh/dVLVu/LuQcUbDz8pc=; b=IcfqMZ/DLoNIkHMhidhT2DMDjojYa6RGr23yJQUbYEWzaZ+Stn3p5nvagV1dJE8y9S rqNssBiH6DuPDFChshstfEIM4EDS6mQz5qrriqf0K5AS2qobm/9CL0WYd2acIYVWKAJP Tjoks5LC1r+oz4L+08AfMRp1yb3xwKhpyzv52Oan1YH3VpJNSVf186HvEOfFT3CKGuE/ 5F3oAYeqBB45Zp28m9PgD/hO4tkJNT0yr3MT0ms28UsjJAncKO43PWaKKfG4iHx00ECB AXLieefvhT/VLnfFdwrFFgOy1DscgAmpH5qnStiTW6e/rXw1V7FGnm8IJLvFD4qiGiZ/ l6DQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5309lYm3rRvJENhQe4g4r+sI/GS7M1lUcv5dFrKlLvRiclozIHOo vuulMIddQxTW7NxCdRfbj46n5A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzV9I/1jO0ij8KF1ngerhZUW0uge9IpUFXv4nROGyQiw1Pt6a1Zao6nhgJZ9LT4b07U+qKwrA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6602:2f0a:b0:64f:99ed:d732 with SMTP id q10-20020a0566022f0a00b0064f99edd732mr1851747iow.150.1649968569030; Thu, 14 Apr 2022 13:36:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2620:15c:183:200:e02:decc:64d3:b1d3]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h7-20020a056e021d8700b002ca753db1c9sm1660605ila.77.2022.04.14.13.36.07 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 14 Apr 2022 13:36:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2022 14:36:03 -0600 From: Yu Zhao To: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Linux-MM , Andi Kleen , Andrew Morton , Aneesh Kumar , Catalin Marinas , Dave Hansen , Hillf Danton , Jens Axboe , Jesse Barnes , Johannes Weiner , Jonathan Corbet , Linus Torvalds , Matthew Wilcox , Mel Gorman , Michael Larabel , Michal Hocko , Mike Rapoport , Rik van Riel , Vlastimil Babka , Will Deacon , Ying Huang , LAK , Linux Doc Mailing List , LKML , Kernel Page Reclaim v2 , x86 , Brian Geffon , Jan Alexander Steffens , Oleksandr Natalenko , Steven Barrett , Suleiman Souhlal , Daniel Byrne , Donald Carr , Holger =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hoffst=E4tte?= , Konstantin Kharlamov , Shuang Zhai , Sofia Trinh , Vaibhav Jain Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 06/14] mm: multi-gen LRU: minimal implementation Message-ID: References: <20220407031525.2368067-1-yuzhao@google.com> <20220407031525.2368067-7-yuzhao@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 06:03:10PM +1200, Barry Song wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 3:16 PM Yu Zhao wrote: > > > > + > > +static int isolate_folios(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc, int swappiness, > > + int *type_scanned, struct list_head *list) > > +{ > > + int i; > > + int type; > > + int scanned; > > + int tier = -1; > > + DEFINE_MIN_SEQ(lruvec); > > + > > + VM_BUG_ON(!seq_is_valid(lruvec)); > > + > > + /* > > + * Try to make the obvious choice first. When anon and file are both > > + * available from the same generation, interpret swappiness 1 as file > > + * first and 200 as anon first. > > + */ > > Has this changed the ABI of swapiness? No. > or it is only something > meaningful for the internal code? This is how swappiness is interpreted. > if so, can we rename it to > something else? otherwise, it is quite confusing. Feel free to suggest something. > it seems 1 is set internally as a magic number here: > +static void lru_gen_shrink_lruvec(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct > scan_control *sc) > +{ > + ... > + else if (!cgroup_reclaim(sc) && get_swappiness(lruvec, sc)) > + swappiness = 1; > + else > + swappiness = 0; > + } > obviously this swappiness is neither /proc/sys/vm/swappiness nor > /sys/fs/cgroup/memory//>memory.swappiness, right? Right. > > @@ -3928,6 +4726,11 @@ static void age_active_anon(struct pglist_data *pgdat, > > struct mem_cgroup *memcg; > > struct lruvec *lruvec; > > > > + if (lru_gen_enabled()) { > > + lru_gen_age_node(pgdat, sc); > > + return; > > + } > > is it really a good place for lru_gen_age_node() since the function > is named age_active_anon() > but here you are doing aging for both anon and file pages? Yes. > obviously > lru_gen_age_node() is not > doing "age active anon". We can rename it if you have something in mind.