linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Cc: "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	"linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Minchan Kim <minchan.kim@gmail.com>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>,
	Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/10] vmscan: isolated_lru_pages() stop neighbour search if neighbour cannot be isolated
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 14:27:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100908132742.GF29263@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100908131404.GA12660@localhost>

On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 09:14:04PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 08:50:44PM +0800, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 07:37:34PM +0800, Wu Fengguang wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 06, 2010 at 06:47:31PM +0800, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > > > From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> > > > 
> > > > isolate_lru_pages() does not just isolate LRU tail pages, but also isolate
> > > > neighbour pages of the eviction page. The neighbour search does not stop even
> > > > if neighbours cannot be isolated which is excessive as the lumpy reclaim will
> > > > no longer result in a successful higher order allocation. This patch stops
> > > > the PFN neighbour pages if an isolation fails and moves on to the next block.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
> > > > ---
> > > >  mm/vmscan.c |   24 ++++++++++++++++--------
> > > >  1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
> > > > index 64f9ca5..ff52b46 100644
> > > > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > > > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > > > @@ -1047,14 +1047,18 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> > > >  				continue;
> > > >  
> > > >  			/* Avoid holes within the zone. */
> > > > -			if (unlikely(!pfn_valid_within(pfn)))
> > > > +			if (unlikely(!pfn_valid_within(pfn))) {
> > > > +				nr_lumpy_failed++;
> > > >  				break;
> > > > +			}
> > > >  
> > > >  			cursor_page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
> > > >  
> > > >  			/* Check that we have not crossed a zone boundary. */
> > > > -			if (unlikely(page_zone_id(cursor_page) != zone_id))
> > > > -				continue;
> > > > +			if (unlikely(page_zone_id(cursor_page) != zone_id)) {
> > > > +				nr_lumpy_failed++;
> > > > +				break;
> > > > +			}
> > > >  
> > > >  			/*
> > > >  			 * If we don't have enough swap space, reclaiming of
> > > > @@ -1062,8 +1066,10 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> > > >  			 * pointless.
> > > >  			 */
> > > >  			if (nr_swap_pages <= 0 && PageAnon(cursor_page) &&
> > > > -					!PageSwapCache(cursor_page))
> > > > -				continue;
> > > > +			    !PageSwapCache(cursor_page)) {
> > > > +				nr_lumpy_failed++;
> > > > +				break;
> > > > +			}
> > > >  
> > > >  			if (__isolate_lru_page(cursor_page, mode, file) == 0) {
> > > >  				list_move(&cursor_page->lru, dst);
> > > > @@ -1074,9 +1080,11 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
> > > >  					nr_lumpy_dirty++;
> > > >  				scan++;
> > > >  			} else {
> > > > -				if (mode == ISOLATE_BOTH &&
> > > > -						page_count(cursor_page))
> > > > -					nr_lumpy_failed++;
> > > > +				/* the page is freed already. */
> > > > +				if (!page_count(cursor_page))
> > > > +					continue;
> > > > +				nr_lumpy_failed++;
> > > > +				break;
> > > >  			}
> > > >  		}
> > > 
> > > The many nr_lumpy_failed++ can be moved here:
> > > 
> > >                 if (pfn < end_pfn)
> > >                         nr_lumpy_failed++;
> > > 
> > 
> > Because the break stops the loop iterating, is there an advantage to
> > making it a pfn check instead? I might be misunderstanding your
> > suggestion.
> 
> The complete view in my mind is
> 
>                 for (; pfn < end_pfn; pfn++) {
>                         if (failed 1)
>                                 break;
>                         if (failed 2)
>                                 break;
>                         if (failed 3)
>                                 break;
>                 }
>                 if (pfn < end_pfn)
>                         nr_lumpy_failed++;
> 
> Sure it just reduces several lines of code :)
> 

Fair point. I applied the following patch on top.

diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 33d27a4..54df972 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -1091,18 +1091,14 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
 				continue;
 
 			/* Avoid holes within the zone. */
-			if (unlikely(!pfn_valid_within(pfn))) {
-				nr_lumpy_failed++;
+			if (unlikely(!pfn_valid_within(pfn)))
 				break;
-			}
 
 			cursor_page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
 
 			/* Check that we have not crossed a zone boundary. */
-			if (unlikely(page_zone_id(cursor_page) != zone_id)) {
-				nr_lumpy_failed++;
+			if (unlikely(page_zone_id(cursor_page) != zone_id))
 				break;
-			}
 
 			/*
 			 * If we don't have enough swap space, reclaiming of
@@ -1110,10 +1106,8 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
 			 * pointless.
 			 */
 			if (nr_swap_pages <= 0 && PageAnon(cursor_page) &&
-			    !PageSwapCache(cursor_page)) {
-				nr_lumpy_failed++;
+			    !PageSwapCache(cursor_page))
 				break;
-			}
 
 			if (__isolate_lru_page(cursor_page, mode, file) == 0) {
 				list_move(&cursor_page->lru, dst);
@@ -1127,10 +1121,13 @@ static unsigned long isolate_lru_pages(unsigned long nr_to_scan,
 				/* the page is freed already. */
 				if (!page_count(cursor_page))
 					continue;
-				nr_lumpy_failed++;
 				break;
 			}
 		}
+
+		/* If we break out of the loop above, lumpy reclaim failed */
+		if (pfn < end_pfn)
+			nr_lumpy_failed++;
 	}
 
 	*scanned = scan;

--
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:[~2010-09-08 13:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-06 10:47 [PATCH 0/9] Reduce latencies and improve overall reclaim efficiency v1 Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 01/10] tracing, vmscan: Add trace events for LRU list shrinking Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 02/10] writeback: Account for time spent congestion_waited Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 03/10] writeback: Do not congestion sleep if there are no congested BDIs or significant writeback Mel Gorman
2010-09-07 15:25   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-08 11:04     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-08 14:52       ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-09  8:54         ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-12 15:37           ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-13  8:55             ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13  9:48               ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-13 10:07                 ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13 10:20                   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-13 10:30                     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-08 21:23   ` Andrew Morton
2010-09-09 10:43     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-09  3:02   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-09  8:58     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 04/10] vmscan: Synchronous lumpy reclaim should not call congestion_wait() Mel Gorman
2010-09-07 15:26   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-08  6:15   ` Johannes Weiner
2010-09-08 11:25   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-09  3:03   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 05/10] vmscan: Synchrounous lumpy reclaim use lock_page() instead trylock_page() Mel Gorman
2010-09-07 15:28   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-08  6:16   ` Johannes Weiner
2010-09-08 11:28   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-09  3:04   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-09  3:15     ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-09  3:25       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-09  4:13       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-09  9:22         ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-10 10:25           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-10 10:33             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-13  9:14             ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-14 10:14               ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 06/10] vmscan: Narrow the scenarios lumpy reclaim uses synchrounous reclaim Mel Gorman
2010-09-09  3:14   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 07/10] vmscan: Remove dead code in shrink_inactive_list() Mel Gorman
2010-09-07 15:33   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 08/10] vmscan: isolated_lru_pages() stop neighbour search if neighbour cannot be isolated Mel Gorman
2010-09-07 15:37   ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-08 11:12     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-08 14:58       ` Minchan Kim
2010-09-08 11:37   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-08 12:50     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-08 13:14       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-08 13:27         ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2010-09-09  3:17   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 09/10] vmscan: Do not writeback filesystem pages in direct reclaim Mel Gorman
2010-09-13 13:31   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-13 13:55     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13 14:33       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-10-28 21:50   ` Christoph Hellwig
2010-10-29 10:26     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-06 10:47 ` [PATCH 10/10] vmscan: Kick flusher threads to clean pages when reclaim is encountering dirty pages Mel Gorman
2010-09-09  3:22   ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-09  9:32     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13  0:53       ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2010-09-13 13:48   ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-13 14:10     ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13 14:41       ` Wu Fengguang
2010-09-06 10:49 ` [PATCH 0/9] Reduce latencies and improve overall reclaim efficiency v1 Mel Gorman
2010-09-08  3:14 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2010-09-08  8:38   ` Mel Gorman
2010-09-13 23:10 ` Minchan Kim

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=20100908132742.GF29263@csn.ul.ie \
    --to=mel@csn.ul.ie \
    --cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
    --cc=david@fromorbit.com \
    --cc=fengguang.wu@intel.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=minchan.kim@gmail.com \
    --cc=riel@redhat.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 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).