From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Cc: Alexey Lyahkov <alexey.lyashkov@gmail.com>,
Andrew Perepechko <anserper@ya.ru>,
Robin Dong <sanbai@taobao.com>, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Bernd Schubert <bernd.schubert@fastmail.fm>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com>,
Linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-ext4 <linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm: Activate !PageLRU pages on mark_page_accessed if page is on local pagevec
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 15:55:00 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130515155500.ffe53764d9018c80572544cc@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1368440482-27909-4-git-send-email-mgorman@suse.de>
On Mon, 13 May 2013 11:21:21 +0100 Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> wrote:
> If a page is on a pagevec then it is !PageLRU and mark_page_accessed()
> may fail to move a page to the active list as expected. Now that the LRU
> is selected at LRU drain time, mark pages PageActive if they are on the
> local pagevec so it gets moved to the correct list at LRU drain time.
> Using a debugging patch it was found that for a simple git checkout based
> workload that pages were never added to the active file list in practice
> but with this patch applied they are.
>
> before after
> LRU Add Active File 0 750583
> LRU Add Active Anon 2640587 2702818
> LRU Add Inactive File 8833662 8068353
> LRU Add Inactive Anon 207 200
>
> Note that only pages on the local pagevec are considered on purpose. A
> !PageLRU page could be in the process of being released, reclaimed, migrated
> or on a remote pagevec that is currently being drained. Marking it PageActive
> is vunerable to races where PageLRU and Active bits are checked at the
> wrong time. Page reclaim will trigger VM_BUG_ONs but depending on when the
> race hits, it could also free a PageActive page to the page allocator and
> trigger a bad_page warning. Similarly a potential race exists between a
> per-cpu drain on a pagevec list and an activation on a remote CPU.
>
> lru_add_drain_cpu
> __pagevec_lru_add
> lru = page_lru(page);
> mark_page_accessed
> if (PageLRU(page))
> activate_page
> else
> SetPageActive
> SetPageLRU(page);
> add_page_to_lru_list(page, lruvec, lru);
>
> In this case a PageActive page is added to the inactivate list and later the
> inactive/active stats will get skewed. While the PageActive checks in vmscan
> could be removed and potentially dealt with, a skew in the statistics would
> be very difficult to detect. Hence this patch deals just with the common case
> where a page being marked accessed has just been added to the local pagevec.
but but but
> --- a/mm/swap.c
> +++ b/mm/swap.c
> @@ -431,6 +431,27 @@ void activate_page(struct page *page)
> }
> #endif
>
> +static void __lru_cache_activate_page(struct page *page)
> +{
> + struct pagevec *pvec = &get_cpu_var(lru_add_pvec);
> + int i;
> +
> + /*
> + * Search backwards on the optimistic assumption that the page being
> + * activated has just been added to this pagevec
> + */
> + for (i = pagevec_count(pvec) - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
> + struct page *pagevec_page = pvec->pages[i];
> +
> + if (pagevec_page == page) {
> + SetPageActive(page);
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + put_cpu_var(lru_add_pvec);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Mark a page as having seen activity.
> *
> @@ -441,8 +462,17 @@ void activate_page(struct page *page)
> void mark_page_accessed(struct page *page)
> {
> if (!PageActive(page) && !PageUnevictable(page) &&
> - PageReferenced(page) && PageLRU(page)) {
> - activate_page(page);
> + PageReferenced(page)) {
> +
> + /*
> + * If the page is on the LRU, promote immediately. Otherwise,
> + * assume the page is on a pagevec, mark it active and it'll
> + * be moved to the active LRU on the next drain
> + */
> + if (PageLRU(page))
> + activate_page(page);
> + else
> + __lru_cache_activate_page(page);
> ClearPageReferenced(page);
> } else if (!PageReferenced(page)) {
> SetPageReferenced(page);
For starters, activate_page() doesn't "promote immediately". It sticks
the page into yet another pagevec for deferred activation.
Also, I really worry about the fact that
activate_page()->drain->__activate_page() will simply skip over the
page if it has PageActive set! So PageActive does something useful if
the page is in the add-to-lru pagevec but nothing useful if the page is
in the activate-it-soon pagevec. This is a confusing, unobvious bug
attractant.
Secondly, I really don't see how this code avoids the races. Suppose
the page gets spilled from the to-add-to-lru pagevec and onto the real
LRU while mark_page_accessed() is concurrently executing. We end up
setting PageActive on a page which is on the inactive LRU? Maybe this
is a can't-happen, in which case it's nowhere near clear enough *why*
this can't happen.
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-15 22:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-13 10:21 [PATCH 0/4] Obey mark_page_accessed hint given by filesystems v2 Mel Gorman
2013-05-13 10:21 ` [PATCH 1/4] mm: Add tracepoints for LRU activation and insertions Mel Gorman
2013-05-15 17:39 ` Rik van Riel
2013-05-13 10:21 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm: pagevec: Defer deciding what LRU to add a page to until pagevec drain time Mel Gorman
2013-05-15 22:53 ` Andrew Morton
2013-05-16 14:29 ` Mel Gorman
2013-05-13 10:21 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm: Activate !PageLRU pages on mark_page_accessed if page is on local pagevec Mel Gorman
2013-05-15 17:40 ` Rik van Riel
2013-05-15 22:55 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2013-05-16 13:41 ` Mel Gorman
2013-05-20 22:09 ` Andrew Morton
2013-05-13 10:21 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm: Remove lru parameter from __pagevec_lru_add and remove parts of pagevec API Mel Gorman
2013-05-15 17:46 ` Rik van Riel
2013-05-15 22:56 ` Andrew Morton
2013-05-16 14:19 ` Mel Gorman
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=20130515155500.ffe53764d9018c80572544cc@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com \
--cc=alexey.lyashkov@gmail.com \
--cc=anserper@ya.ru \
--cc=bernd.schubert@fastmail.fm \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=sanbai@taobao.com \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).