From: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2016 00:26:33 +0900
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>, Ming Ling <ming.ling@spreadtrum.com>,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, mgorman@techsingularity.net, vbabka@suse.cz,
        hannes@cmpxchg.org, baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com,
        iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, rientjes@google.com, hughd@google.com,
        kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, riel@redhat.com, mgorman@suse.de,
        aquini@redhat.com, corbet@lwn.net, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, orson.zhai@spreadtrum.com,
        geng.ren@spreadtrum.com, chunyan.zhang@spreadtrum.com,
        zhizhou.tian@spreadtrum.com, yuming.han@spreadtrum.com,
        xiajing@spreadst.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: exclude isolated non-lru pages from
 NR_ISOLATED_ANON or NR_ISOLATED_FILE.
Message-ID: <20161014152633.GA3157@blaptop>
References: <1476340749-13281-1-git-send-email-ming.ling@spreadtrum.com>
 <20161013080936.GG21678@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20161014083219.GA20260@spreadtrum.com>
 <20161014113044.GB6063@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20161014134604.GA2179@blaptop>
 <20161014135334.GF6063@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <20161014144448.GA2899@blaptop>
 <20161014150355.GH6063@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161014150355.GH6063@dhcp22.suse.cz>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 3161
Lines: 70

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 05:03:55PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 14-10-16 23:44:48, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 03:53:34PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Fri 14-10-16 22:46:04, Minchan Kim wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > > > > Why don't you simply mimic what shrink_inactive_list does? Aka count the
> > > > > > > number of isolated pages and then account them when appropriate?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > I think i am correcting clearly wrong part. So, there is no need to
> > > > > > describe it too detailed. It's a misunderstanding, and i will add
> > > > > > more comments as you suggest.
> > > > > 
> > > > > OK, so could you explain why you prefer to relyon __PageMovable rather
> > > > > than do a trivial counting during the isolation?
> > > > 
> > > > I don't get it. Could you elaborate it a bit more?
> > > 
> > > It is really simple. You can count the number of file and anonymous
> > > pages while they are isolated and then account them to NR_ISOLATED_*
> > > later. Basically the same thing we do during the reclaim. We absolutely
> > > do not have to rely on __PageMovable and make this code more complex
> > > than necessary.
> > 
> > I don't understand your point.
> > isolate_migratepages_block can isolate any movable pages, for instance,
> > anon, file and non-lru and they are isolated into cc->migratepges.
> > Then, acct_isolated accounts them to NR_ISOLATED_*.
> > Isn't it same with the one you suggested?
> > The problem is we should identify which pages is non-lru movable first.
> > If it's not non-lru, it means the page is either anon or file so we
> > can account them. 
> > That's exactly waht Ming Ling did.
> > 
> > Sorry if I didn't get your point. Maybe, it would be better to give
> > pseudo code out of your mind for better understanding rather than
> > several ping-ping with vague words.
> 
> diff --git a/mm/compaction.c b/mm/compaction.c
> index 0409a4ad6ea1..6584705a46f6 100644
> --- a/mm/compaction.c
> +++ b/mm/compaction.c
> @@ -685,7 +685,8 @@ static bool too_many_isolated(struct zone *zone)
>   */
>  static unsigned long
>  isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,
> -			unsigned long end_pfn, isolate_mode_t isolate_mode)
> +			unsigned long end_pfn, isolate_mode_t isolate_mode,
> +			unsigned long *isolated_file, unsigned long *isolated_anon)
>  {
>  	struct zone *zone = cc->zone;
>  	unsigned long nr_scanned = 0, nr_isolated = 0;
> @@ -866,6 +867,10 @@ isolate_migratepages_block(struct compact_control *cc, unsigned long low_pfn,
>  
>  		/* Successfully isolated */
>  		del_page_from_lru_list(page, lruvec, page_lru(page));
> +		if (page_is_file_cache(page))
> +			(*isolated_file)++;
> +		else
> +			(*isolated_anon)++;
>  
>  isolate_success:
>  		list_add(&page->lru, &cc->migratepages);
> 
> Makes more sense?

It is doable for isolation part. IOW, maybe we can make acct_isolated
simple with those counters but we need to handle migrate, putback part.
If you want to remove the check of __PageMoable with those counter, it
means we should pass the counter on every functions related migration
where isolate, migrate, putback parts.