Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1595681998-19193-1-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
 <1595681998-19193-22-git-send-email-alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
 <CAKgT0UfpHjBTHvtZz7=WMhZZAunVYuNMpuYBQCiorERb5seFUQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <f34e790f-50e6-112c-622f-d7ab804c6d22@linux.alibaba.com> <CAKgT0UckqbmYJDE3L2Bg1Nr=Y=GT0OBx1GEhaZ14EbRTzd8tiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <a1c6a3a6-f8e3-7bb5-e881-216a4b57ae84@linux.alibaba.com>
In-Reply-To: <a1c6a3a6-f8e3-7bb5-e881-216a4b57ae84@linux.alibaba.com>
From:   Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 6 Aug 2020 09:27:16 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKgT0UcARhDAVYkJAPe=P5XBfk9fdyGPx0S7rqhiLLhg3s62dQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 21/21] mm/lru: revise the comments of lru_lock
To:     Alex Shi <alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
        Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Konstantin Khlebnikov <khlebnikov@yandex-team.ru>,
        Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@oracle.com>,
        Yang Shi <yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, cgroups@vger.kernel.org,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
        Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Rong Chen <rong.a.chen@intel.com>,
        Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@virtuozzo.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 6:39 PM Alex Shi <alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> =E5=9C=A8 2020/8/4 =E4=B8=8B=E5=8D=8810:29, Alexander Duyck =E5=86=99=E9=
=81=93:
> > On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 3:04 AM Alex Shi <alex.shi@linux.alibaba.com> wr=
ote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> =E5=9C=A8 2020/8/4 =E4=B8=8A=E5=8D=886:37, Alexander Duyck =E5=86=99=
=E9=81=93:
> >>>>
> >>>>  shrink_inactive_list() also diverts any unevictable pages that it f=
inds on the
> >>>> -inactive lists to the appropriate zone's unevictable list.
> >>>> +inactive lists to the appropriate node's unevictable list.
> >>>>
> >>>>  shrink_inactive_list() should only see SHM_LOCK'd pages that became=
 SHM_LOCK'd
> >>>>  after shrink_active_list() had moved them to the inactive list, or =
pages mapped
> >>> Same here.
> >>
> >> lruvec is used per memcg per node actually, and it fallback to node if=
 memcg disabled.
> >> So the comments are still right.
> >>
> >> And most of changes just fix from zone->lru_lock to pgdat->lru_lock ch=
ange.
> >
> > Actually in my mind one thing that might work better would be to
> > explain what the lruvec is and where it resides. Then replace zone
> > with lruvec since that is really where the unevictable list resides.
> > Then it would be correct for both the memcg and pgdat case.
>
> Could you like to revise the doc as your thought?
> >
> >>>
> >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm_types.h b/include/linux/mm_types.h
> >>>> index 64ede5f150dc..44738cdb5a55 100644
> >>>> --- a/include/linux/mm_types.h
> >>>> +++ b/include/linux/mm_types.h
> >>>> @@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ struct page {
> >>>>                 struct {        /* Page cache and anonymous pages */
> >>>>                         /**
> >>>>                          * @lru: Pageout list, eg. active_list prote=
cted by
> >>>> -                        * pgdat->lru_lock.  Sometimes used as a gen=
eric list
> >>>> +                        * lruvec->lru_lock.  Sometimes used as a ge=
neric list
> >>>>                          * by the page owner.
> >>>>                          */
> >>>>                         struct list_head lru;
> >>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> >>>> index 8af956aa13cf..c92289a4e14d 100644
> >>>> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
> >>>> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> >>>> @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ static inline bool free_area_empty(struct free_a=
rea *area, int migratetype)
> >>>>  struct pglist_data;
> >>>>
> >>>>  /*
> >>>> - * zone->lock and the zone lru_lock are two of the hottest locks in=
 the kernel.
> >>>> + * zone->lock and the lru_lock are two of the hottest locks in the =
kernel.
> >>>>   * So add a wild amount of padding here to ensure that they fall in=
to separate
> >>>>   * cachelines.  There are very few zone structures in the machine, =
so space
> >>>>   * consumption is not a concern here.
> >>> So I don't believe you are using ZONE_PADDING in any way to try and
> >>> protect the LRU lock currently. At least you aren't using it in the
> >>> lruvec. As such it might make sense to just drop the reference to the
> >>> lru_lock here. That reminds me that we still need to review the
> >>> placement of the lru_lock and determine if there might be a better
> >>> placement and/or padding that might improve performance when under
> >>> heavy stress.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Right, is it the following looks better?
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> >> index ccc76590f823..0ed520954843 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h
> >> @@ -113,8 +113,7 @@ static inline bool free_area_empty(struct free_are=
a *area, int migratetype)
> >>  struct pglist_data;
> >>
> >>  /*
> >> - * zone->lock and the lru_lock are two of the hottest locks in the ke=
rnel.
> >> - * So add a wild amount of padding here to ensure that they fall into=
 separate
> >> + * Add a wild amount of padding here to ensure datas fall into separa=
te
> >>   * cachelines.  There are very few zone structures in the machine, so=
 space
> >>   * consumption is not a concern here.
> >>   */
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >> Alex
> >
> > I would maybe tweak it to make sure it is clear that we are using this
> > to pad out items that are likely to cause cache thrash such as various
> > hot spinocks and such.
> >
>
> I appreciate if you like to change the doc better. :)

Give me a day or so. I will submit a follow-on patch with some cleanup
for the comments.

Thanks.

- Alex