From: Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@openvz.org>
To: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Cc: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Johannes Weiner <jweiner@redhat.com>,
"linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7 v2] mm: rework __isolate_lru_page() file/anon filter
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 13:46:06 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F5B22DE.4020402@openvz.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F5AFAF0.6060608@openvz.org>
Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> Hugh Dickins wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 Mar 2012, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually __isolate_lru_page() even little bit bigger
>>
>> I was coming to realize that it must be your page_lru()ing:
>> although it's dressed up in one line, there's several branches there.
>
> Yes, but I think we can optimize page_lru(): we can prepare ready-to-use
> page lru index in lower bits of page->flags, if we swap page flags and split
> LRU_UNEVICTABLE into FILE/ANON parts.
>
>>
>> I think you'll find you have a clear winner at last, if you just pass
>> lru on down as third arg to __isolate_lru_page(), where file used to
>> be passed, instead of re-evaluating it inside.
>>
>> shrink callers already have the lru, and compaction works it out
>> immediately afterwards.
>
> No, for non-lumpy isolation we don't need this check at all,
> because all pages already picked from right lru list.
>
> I'll send separate patch for this (on top v5 patchset), after meditation =)
Heh, looks like we don't need these checks at all:
without RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM we isolate only pages from right lru,
with RECLAIM_MODE_LUMPYRECLAIM we isolate pages from all evictable lru.
Thus we should check only PageUnevictable() on lumpy reclaim.
>
>>
>> Though we do need to be careful: the lumpy case would then have to
>> pass page_lru(cursor_page). Oh, actually no (though it would deserve
>> a comment): since the lumpy case selects LRU_ALL_EVICTABLE, it's
>> irrelevant what it passes for lru, so might as well stick with
>> the one passed down. Though you may decide I'm being too tricky
>> there, and prefer to calculate page_lru(cursor_page) anyway, it
>> not being the hottest path.
>>
>> Whether you'd still want page_lru(page) __always_inline, I don't know.
>>
>> Hugh
>
> --
> 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/ .
> Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
> Don't email:<a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org</a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-10 9:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-29 9:15 [PATCH v4 ch1 0/7] mm: some cleanup/rework before lru_lock splitting Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-02-29 9:15 ` [PATCH 1/7] mm/memcg: scanning_global_lru means mem_cgroup_disabled Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-02 5:12 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-06 11:46 ` Glauber Costa
2012-02-29 9:15 ` [PATCH 2/7] mm/memcg: move reclaim_stat into lruvec Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-02 5:14 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-02-29 9:15 ` [PATCH 3/7] mm: rework __isolate_lru_page() file/anon filter Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-02 5:17 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-02 5:51 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-02 8:17 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-02 8:53 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-06 11:57 ` Glauber Costa
2012-03-06 12:53 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-03 0:22 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-03 8:27 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-03 9:20 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-03 9:16 ` [PATCH 3/7 v2] " Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-05 0:27 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-07 3:22 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-08 5:30 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-09 2:06 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-09 7:16 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-10 0:04 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-10 6:55 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-10 9:46 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov [this message]
2012-03-15 1:47 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-03-15 6:03 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-15 23:58 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-02-29 9:15 ` [PATCH 4/7] mm: push lru index into shrink_[in]active_list() Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-02 5:21 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-03 0:24 ` Hugh Dickins
2012-02-29 9:15 ` [PATCH 5/7] mm: rework reclaim_stat counters Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-02 5:28 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-02 6:11 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-02 8:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-02-29 9:16 ` [PATCH 6/7] mm/memcg: rework inactive_ratio calculation Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-02 5:31 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-03-02 6:24 ` Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-08 5:36 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2012-02-29 9:16 ` [PATCH 7/7] mm/memcg: use vm_swappiness from target memory cgroup Konstantin Khlebnikov
2012-03-02 5:32 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
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=4F5B22DE.4020402@openvz.org \
--to=khlebnikov@openvz.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=jweiner@redhat.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.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).