Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
To:     Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        "Shaohua Li" <shli@kernel.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>,
        Zi Yan <zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm -v4 05/21] mm, THP, swap: Support PMD swap mapping in free_swap_and_cache()/swap_free()
References: <20180622035151.6676-1-ying.huang@intel.com>
        <20180622035151.6676-6-ying.huang@intel.com>
        <20180705183318.je4gd32awgh2tnb5@ca-dmjordan1.us.oracle.com>
Date:   Fri, 06 Jul 2018 20:49:05 +0800
In-Reply-To: <20180705183318.je4gd32awgh2tnb5@ca-dmjordan1.us.oracle.com>
        (Daniel Jordan's message of "Thu, 5 Jul 2018 11:33:18 -0700")
Message-ID: <877em8msvy.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ascii
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com> writes:

> On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 11:51:35AM +0800, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> +static unsigned char swap_free_cluster(struct swap_info_struct *si,
>> +				       swp_entry_t entry)
> ...
>> +	/* Cluster has been split, free each swap entries in cluster */
>> +	if (!cluster_is_huge(ci)) {
>> +		unlock_cluster(ci);
>> +		for (i = 0; i < SWAPFILE_CLUSTER; i++, entry.val++) {
>> +			if (!__swap_entry_free(si, entry, 1)) {
>> +				free_entries++;
>> +				free_swap_slot(entry);
>> +			}
>> +		}
>
> Is is better on average to use __swap_entry_free_locked instead of
> __swap_entry_free here?  I'm not sure myself, just asking.
>
> As it's written, if the cluster's been split, we always take and drop the
> cluster lock 512 times, but if we don't expect to call free_swap_slot that
> often, then we could just drop and retake the cluster lock inside the innermost
> 'if' against the possibility that free_swap_slot eventually makes us take the
> cluster lock again.

Yes.  This is a good idea.  Thanks for your suggestion!  I will change
this in the next version.

Best Regards,
Huang, Ying

> ...
>> +		return !(free_entries == SWAPFILE_CLUSTER);
>
>                 return free_entries != SWAPFILE_CLUSTER;