Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759484Ab2FAVEF (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2012 17:04:05 -0400 Received: from e34.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.152]:42262 "EHLO e34.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759439Ab2FAVEB (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jun 2012 17:04:01 -0400 Message-ID: <4FC92E30.4000906@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2012 14:03:44 -0700 From: John Stultz User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: KOSAKI Motohiro CC: LKML , Andrew Morton , Android Kernel Team , Robert Love , Mel Gorman , Hugh Dickins , Dave Hansen , Rik van Riel , Dmitry Adamushko , Dave Chinner , Neil Brown , Andrea Righi , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , Taras Glek , Mike Hommey , Jan Kara Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] [RFC] tmpfs: Add FALLOC_FL_MARK_VOLATILE/UNMARK_VOLATILE handlers References: <1338575387-26972-1-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org> <1338575387-26972-4-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org> <4FC9235F.5000402@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4FC9235F.5000402@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-2022-JP Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 12060121-1780-0000-0000-00000614DD75 X-IBM-ISS-SpamDetectors: X-IBM-ISS-DetailInfo: BY=3.00000279; HX=3.00000188; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000001; SC=3.00000002; SDB=6.00144350; UDB=6.00033153; UTC=2012-06-01 21:04:00 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3122 Lines: 79 On 06/01/2012 01:17 PM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > Hi John, > > (6/1/12 2:29 PM), John Stultz wrote: >> This patch enables FALLOC_FL_MARK_VOLATILE/UNMARK_VOLATILE >> functionality for tmpfs making use of the volatile range >> management code. >> >> Conceptually, FALLOC_FL_MARK_VOLATILE is like a delayed >> FALLOC_FL_PUNCH_HOLE. This allows applications that have >> data caches that can be re-created to tell the kernel that >> some memory contains data that is useful in the future, but >> can be recreated if needed, so if the kernel needs, it can >> zap the memory without having to swap it out. >> >> In use, applications use FALLOC_FL_MARK_VOLATILE to mark >> page ranges as volatile when they are not in use. Then later >> if they wants to reuse the data, they use >> FALLOC_FL_UNMARK_VOLATILE, which will return an error if the >> data has been purged. >> >> This is very much influenced by the Android Ashmem interface by >> Robert Love so credits to him and the Android developers. >> In many cases the code& logic come directly from the ashmem patch. >> The intent of this patch is to allow for ashmem-like behavior, but >> embeds the idea a little deeper into the VM code. >> >> This is a reworked version of the fadvise volatile idea submitted >> earlier to the list. Thanks to Dave Chinner for suggesting to >> rework the idea in this fashion. Also thanks to Dmitry Adamushko >> for continued review and bug reporting, and Dave Hansen for >> help with the original design and mentoring me in the VM code. > I like this patch concept. This is cleaner than userland > notification quirk. But I don't like you use shrinker. Because of, > after applying this patch, normal page reclaim path can still make > swap out. this is undesirable. Any recommendations for alternative approaches? What should I be hooking into in order to get notified that tmpfs should drop volatile pages? >> +static >> +int shmem_volatile_shrink(struct shrinker *ignored, struct shrink_control *sc) >> +{ >> + s64 nr_to_scan = sc->nr_to_scan; >> + const gfp_t gfp_mask = sc->gfp_mask; >> + struct address_space *mapping; >> + loff_t start, end; >> + int ret; >> + s64 page_count; >> + >> + if (nr_to_scan&& !(gfp_mask& __GFP_FS)) >> + return -1; >> + >> + volatile_range_lock(&shmem_volatile_head); >> + page_count = volatile_range_lru_size(&shmem_volatile_head); >> + if (!nr_to_scan) >> + goto out; >> + >> + do { >> + ret = volatile_ranges_get_last_used(&shmem_volatile_head, >> + &mapping,&start,&end); > Why drop last used region? Not recently used region is better? > Sorry, that function name isn't very good. It does return the least-recently-used range, or more specifically: the least-recently-marked-volatile-range. I'll improve that function name, but if I misunderstood you and you have a different suggestion for the purging order, let me know. thanks -john -- 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/