Re: needed lru_add_drain_all() change
From: Kamezawa Hiroyuki <hidden>
Date: 2012-06-29 03:49:45
(2012/06/28 15:23), KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Andrew Morton [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43811 lru_add_drain_all() uses schedule_on_each_cpu(). But schedule_on_each_cpu() hangs if a realtime thread is spinning, pinned to a CPU. There's no intention to change the scheduler behaviour, so I think we should remove schedule_on_each_cpu() from the kernel. The biggest user of schedule_on_each_cpu() is lru_add_drain_all(). Does anyone have any thoughts on how we can do this? The obvious approach is to declare these: static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pagevec[NR_LRU_LISTS], lru_add_pvecs); static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pagevec, lru_rotate_pvecs); static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pagevec, lru_deactivate_pvecs); to be irq-safe and use on_each_cpu(). lru_rotate_pvecs is already irq-safe and converting lru_add_pvecs and lru_deactivate_pvecs looks pretty simple. Thoughts?I agree. But i hope more. In these days, we have plenty lru_add_drain_all() callsite. So, i think we should remove struct pagevec and should aim migration aware new batch mechanism. maybe. This also improve compaction success rate.
migration-aware means an framework which isolate_xxxx_page() can work with ? To do that, we need to know which object points to the page. Hmm. Do you have anyidea ? -Kame -- 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>