Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: support MIGRATE_DISCARD
From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Date: 2012-09-07 08:21:54
Also in:
lkml
On Fri, Sep 07, 2012 at 11:24:34AM +0900, Minchan Kim wrote:
quoted
+unsigned long reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct list_head *page_list) +{ + struct scan_control sc = { + .gfp_mask = GFP_KERNEL, + .priority = DEF_PRIORITY, + }; + unsigned long ret; + struct page *page, *next; + LIST_HEAD(clean_pages); + + list_for_each_entry_safe(page, next, page_list, lru) { + if (page_is_file_cache(page) && !PageDirty(page)) + list_move(&page->lru, &clean_pages); + } + + ret = shrink_page_list(&clean_pages, NULL, &sc, NULL, NULL); + list_splice(&clean_pages, page_list); + return ret; +} +It's different with my point. My intention is to free mapped clean pages as well as not-mapped's one.
Then just set may_unmap == 1?
struct scan_control sc = {
.gfp_mask = GFP_KERNEL,
.may_unmap = 1,
.priority = DEF_PRIORITY
};
How about this? From 0f6986e943e55929b4d7b0220a1c24a6bae1a24d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2012 11:20:48 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] mm: cma: Discard clean pages during contiguous allocation instead of migration This patch introudes MIGRATE_DISCARD mode in migration.
This line is now redundant.
It drops *clean cache pages* instead of migration so that migration latency could be reduced by avoiding (memcpy + page remapping). It's useful for CMA because latency of migration is very important rather than eviction of background processes's workingset. In addition, it needs
processes working set
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
less free pages for migration targets so it could avoid memory reclaiming to get free pages, which is another factor increase latency. Cc: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> Cc: Michal Nazarewicz <redacted> Cc: Rik van Riel <redacted> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de> Signed-off-by: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org> --- mm/internal.h | 2 ++ mm/page_alloc.c | 2 ++ mm/vmscan.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h index 3314f79..be09a7e 100644 --- a/mm/internal.h +++ b/mm/internal.h@@ -355,3 +355,5 @@ extern unsigned long vm_mmap_pgoff(struct file *, unsigned long, unsigned long, unsigned long); extern void set_pageblock_order(void); +unsigned long reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone, + struct list_head *page_list);diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c index ba3100a..bf35e59 100644 --- a/mm/page_alloc.c +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c@@ -5668,6 +5668,8 @@ static int __alloc_contig_migrate_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end) break; } + reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(&cc.migratepages, cc.zone); +
The signature is zone, list_head but you pass in list_head, zone. I expect that generates fun compile warnings and crashes at runtime. The reason that I did not pass in zone to reclaim_clean_pages_from_list() in my version is because I did not want to force the list to all be from the same zone. That will just happen to be true but shrink_page_list() really does not care about the zone from the perspective of this new function. It's used for a debugging check (disable it if !zone) and setting ZONE_CONGESTED which will never be important as far as reclaim_clean_pages_from_list() is concerned. It will never call pageout(). It's up to you if you really want to pass zone in but I would not bother if I was you :)
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
ret = migrate_pages(&cc.migratepages, __alloc_contig_migrate_alloc, 0, false, MIGRATE_SYNC);diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c index 8d01243..525355e 100644 --- a/mm/vmscan.c +++ b/mm/vmscan.c@@ -674,8 +674,10 @@ static enum page_references page_check_references(struct page *page, static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list, struct zone *zone, struct scan_control *sc, + enum ttu_flags ttu_flags, unsigned long *ret_nr_dirty, - unsigned long *ret_nr_writeback) + unsigned long *ret_nr_writeback, + bool force_reclaim) { LIST_HEAD(ret_pages); LIST_HEAD(free_pages);@@ -689,10 +691,10 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list, mem_cgroup_uncharge_start(); while (!list_empty(page_list)) { - enum page_references references; struct address_space *mapping; struct page *page; int may_enter_fs; + enum page_references references = PAGEREF_RECLAIM; cond_resched();@@ -758,7 +760,9 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list, wait_on_page_writeback(page); } - references = page_check_references(page, sc); + if (!force_reclaim) + references = page_check_references(page, sc); + switch (references) { case PAGEREF_ACTIVATE: goto activate_locked;
Good point.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -788,7 +792,7 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list, * processes. Try to unmap it here. */ if (page_mapped(page) && mapping) { - switch (try_to_unmap(page, TTU_UNMAP)) { + switch (try_to_unmap(page, ttu_flags)) { case SWAP_FAIL: goto activate_locked; case SWAP_AGAIN:
Another good point.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -960,6 +964,32 @@ keep: return nr_reclaimed; } +unsigned long reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct zone *zone, + struct list_head *page_list) +{ + struct scan_control sc = { + .gfp_mask = GFP_KERNEL, + .priority = DEF_PRIORITY, + .may_unmap = 1, + };
Yep.
+ unsigned long ret, dummy1, dummy2;
+ struct page *page, *next;
+ LIST_HEAD(clean_pages);
+
+ list_for_each_entry_safe(page, next, page_list, lru) {
+ if (page_is_file_cache(page) && !PageDirty(page)) {
+ ClearPageActive(page);Yep.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ list_move(&page->lru, &clean_pages); + } + } + + ret = shrink_page_list(&clean_pages, zone, &sc, + TTU_UNMAP|TTU_IGNORE_ACCESS, + &dummy1, &dummy2, true); + list_splice(&clean_pages, page_list); + return ret; +} + /* * Attempt to remove the specified page from its LRU. Only take this page * if it is of the appropriate PageActive status. Pages which are being@@ -1278,8 +1308,8 @@ shrink_inactive_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct lruvec *lruvec, if (nr_taken == 0) return 0; - nr_reclaimed = shrink_page_list(&page_list, zone, sc, - &nr_dirty, &nr_writeback); + nr_reclaimed = shrink_page_list(&page_list, zone, sc, TTU_UNMAP, + &nr_dirty, &nr_writeback, false); spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
So other than the mix up of order parameters I think this should work. -- 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>