Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756551AbYFHU6c (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2008 16:58:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754732AbYFHU6Y (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2008 16:58:24 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:49673 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754489AbYFHU6X (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jun 2008 16:58:23 -0400 Date: Sun, 8 Jun 2008 13:57:04 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Rik van Riel Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lee.schermerhorn@hp.com, kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, eric.whitney@hp.com Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm 13/25] Noreclaim LRU Infrastructure Message-Id: <20080608135704.a4b0dbe1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080608163413.08d46427@bree.surriel.com> References: <20080606202838.390050172@redhat.com> <20080606202859.291472052@redhat.com> <20080606180506.081f686a.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20080608163413.08d46427@bree.surriel.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.8 (GTK+ 2.12.5; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3319 Lines: 86 On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 16:34:13 -0400 Rik van Riel wrote: > On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 18:05:06 -0700 > Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 16:28:51 -0400 > > Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > > > > > From: Lee Schermerhorn > > > > The noreclaim infrastructure is enabled by a new mm Kconfig option > > > [CONFIG_]NORECLAIM_LRU. > > > > Having a config option for this really sucks, and needs extra-special > > justification, rather than none. > > I believe the justification is that it uses a page flag. > > PG_noreclaim would be the 20th page flag used, meaning there are > 4 more free if 8 bits are used for zone and node info, which would > give 6 bits for NODE_SHIFT or 64 NUMA nodes - probably overkill > for 32 bit x86. > > If you want I'll get rid of CONFIG_NORECLAIM_LRU and make everything > just compile in always. Seems unlikely to be useful? The only way in which this would be an advantage if if we hae some other feature which also needs a page flag but which will never be concurrently enabled with this one. > Please let me know what your preference is. Don't use another page flag? > > > --- linux-2.6.26-rc2-mm1.orig/include/linux/page-flags.h 2008-05-29 16:21:04.000000000 -0400 > > > +++ linux-2.6.26-rc2-mm1/include/linux/page-flags.h 2008-06-06 16:05:15.000000000 -0400 > > > @@ -94,6 +94,9 @@ enum pageflags { > > > PG_reclaim, /* To be reclaimed asap */ > > > PG_buddy, /* Page is free, on buddy lists */ > > > PG_swapbacked, /* Page is backed by RAM/swap */ > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_NORECLAIM_LRU > > > + PG_noreclaim, /* Page is "non-reclaimable" */ > > > +#endif > > > > I fear that we're messing up the terminology here. > > > > Go into your 2.6.25 tree and do `grep -i reclaimable */*.c'. The term > > already means a few different things, but in the vmscan context, > > "reclaimable" means that the page is unreferenced, clean and can be > > stolen. "reclaimable" also means a lot of other things, and we just > > made that worse. > > > > Can we think of a new term which uniquely describes this new concept > > and use that, rather than flogging the old horse? > > Want to reuse the BSD term "pinned" instead? mm, "pinned" in Linuxland means "someone took a ref on it to prevent it from being reclaimed". As a starting point: what, in your english-language-paragraph-length words, does this flag mean? > > > +/** > > > + * add_page_to_noreclaim_list > > > + * @page: the page to be added to the noreclaim list > > > + * > > > + * Add page directly to its zone's noreclaim list. To avoid races with > > > + * tasks that might be making the page reclaimble while it's not on the > > > + * lru, we want to add the page while it's locked or otherwise "invisible" > > > + * to other tasks. This is difficult to do when using the pagevec cache, > > > + * so bypass that. > > > + */ > > > > How does a task "make a page reclaimable"? munlock()? fsync()? > > exit()? > > > > Choice of terminology matters... > > Lee? Kosaki-san? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/