From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S933305AbdDFArk (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Wed, 5 Apr 2017 20:47:40 -0400
Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:38436 "EHLO mga01.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1755451AbdDFArd (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 5 Apr 2017 20:47:33 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.37,281,1488873600"; 
   d="scan'208";a="83697159"
From: "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Shaohua Li <shli@kernel.org>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm -v2] mm, swap: Sort swap entries before free
References: <20170405071041.24469-1-ying.huang@intel.com>
        <1491403231.16856.11.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 08:47:30 +0800
In-Reply-To: <1491403231.16856.11.camel@redhat.com> (Rik van Riel's message of
        "Wed, 5 Apr 2017 10:40:31 -0400")
Message-ID: <87k26ye50d.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> writes:

> On Wed, 2017-04-05 at 15:10 +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> To solve the issue, the per-CPU buffer is sorted according to the
>> swap
>> device before freeing the swap entries.  Test shows that the time
>> spent by swapcache_free_entries() could be reduced after the patch.
>
> That makes a lot of sense.
>
>> @@ -1075,6 +1083,8 @@ void swapcache_free_entries(swp_entry_t
>> *entries, int n)
>>  
>>  	prev = NULL;
>>  	p = NULL;
>> +	if (nr_swapfiles > 1)
>> +		sort(entries, n, sizeof(entries[0]), swp_entry_cmp,
>> NULL);
>
> But it really wants a comment in the code, so people
> reading the code a few years from now can see why
> we are sorting things we are about to free.
>
> Maybe something like:
>         /* Sort swap entries by swap device, so each lock is only taken
> once. */

Good suggestion!  I will add it in the next version.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying

>>  	for (i = 0; i < n; ++i) {
>>  		p = swap_info_get_cont(entries[i], prev);
>>  		if (p)