From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
To: Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, aarcange@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2]compaction: check lock contention first before taking lock
Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2012 13:24:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120906122449.GR11266@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120906104429.GB12718@kernel.org>
On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 06:44:29PM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> isolate_migratepages_range will take zone->lru_lock first and check if the lock
> is contented, if yes, it will release the lock. This isn't efficient. If the
> lock is truly contented, a lock/unlock pair will increase the lock contention.
> We'd better check if the lock is contended first. compact_trylock_irqsave
> perfectly meets the requirement.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <shli@fusionio.com>
> ---
> mm/compaction.c | 7 ++++---
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> Index: linux/mm/compaction.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux.orig/mm/compaction.c 2012-09-06 14:46:13.923144263 +0800
> +++ linux/mm/compaction.c 2012-09-06 14:46:58.118588574 +0800
> @@ -295,9 +295,9 @@ isolate_migratepages_range(struct zone *
> }
>
> /* Time to isolate some pages for migration */
> - cond_resched();
Why did you remove the cond_resched()? I expect it's because
compact_checklock_irqsave() does a need_resched() check and if it is true
will either call cond_resched() or abort compaction. If it is aborting it
will not call cond_resched() but there is a reasonable expectation that
the caller will schedule soon. If this is the reasoning then it should be
included in the changelog. If it's an accident then leave the cond_resched()
where it is.
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lru_lock, flags);
> - locked = true;
> + locked = compact_trylock_irqsave(&zone->lru_lock, &flags, cc);
> + if (!locked)
> + goto skip;
There is no need for the goto. No useful work has taken place at this
point and there is no need to even trigger the tracepoint. Just return
0.
> for (; low_pfn < end_pfn; low_pfn++) {
> struct page *page;
>
> @@ -400,6 +400,7 @@ isolate_migratepages_range(struct zone *
> if (locked)
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lru_lock, flags);
>
> +skip:
> trace_mm_compaction_isolate_migratepages(nr_scanned, nr_isolated);
>
> if (!nr_isolated)
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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:[~2012-09-06 12:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-09-06 10:44 [patch 2/2]compaction: check lock contention first before taking lock Shaohua Li
2012-09-06 12:24 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2012-09-06 12:57 ` Shaohua Li
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=20120906122449.GR11266@suse.de \
--to=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=shli@kernel.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 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).