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;
Sender: charante=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 smtp.codeaurora.org 4D854C4360D
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: shmem: implement POSIX_FADV_[WILL|DONT]NEED for shmem
To:     Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Cc:     hughd@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, vbabka@suse.cz,
        rientjes@google.com, david@redhat.com, mhocko@suse.com,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
        guptap@codeaurora.org
References: <1633701982-22302-1-git-send-email-charante@codeaurora.org>
 <CAJuCfpEikFP8sifts8-p7zviJSW7A=Tff5ve2Wc6PZEWAP9OXA@mail.gmail.com>
 <442feb78-a1f0-581a-84de-5d33baa5a7f5@codeaurora.org>
 <CAJuCfpEy7UCD6C9OyxzDFV-4AOj7-QQEZa4KXJwZer2BkBnO+g@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Charan Teja Kalla <charante@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <1ef89af2-43a4-415c-3c8b-97dca429a416@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Wed, 3 Nov 2021 18:11:00 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAJuCfpEy7UCD6C9OyxzDFV-4AOj7-QQEZa4KXJwZer2BkBnO+g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Thanks Suren for the reply!!

On 11/2/2021 11:42 PM, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>>> Also not sure if you need to isolate the page before this writeback.
>> Isolation may not be required but this is to avoid trying of the reclaim
>> on the same page in some parallel path as both any way places the page
>> in the swap. Or you want me to remove the isolation here?
> Maybe you could isolate them in bulk then? Seems like a waste
> isolating them one-by-one.

Okay. Should the bulk here be SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX fine?

> 
>>> Won't deleting the page from swap cache interfere with ongoing
>>> writeback if it has not yet completed?
>> I just followed the path of how to reclaim the page:
>> shrink_page_list()
>>      pageout()
>>      ..........
>>      __remove_mapping()
>>         __delete_from_swap_cache()
>>
>> You see some issue here which I can't understand.
> I think shrink_page_list() would not call __remove_mapping() if after
> pageout() PageWriteback() is still true. Maybe I'm missing some path?

I agree here. PG_writeback might have still set on the pages under
background writeback thus should be excluded.

I just considered the case for sync writes, eg:zram,  where PG_writeback
is cleared before returns.

Will update the change accordingly.

> 

-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project