From: Wu Fengguang <wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn>
To: Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <Linux-Kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] mm: delayed page activation
Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2005 21:48:18 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20051204134818.GA4305@mail.ustc.edu.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17298.56560.78408.693927@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
On Sun, Dec 04, 2005 at 03:11:28PM +0300, Nikita Danilov wrote:
> Wu Fengguang writes:
> > When a page is referenced the second time in inactive_list, mark it with
> > PG_activate instead of moving it into active_list immediately. The actual
> > moving work is delayed to vmscan time.
> >
> > This implies two essential changes:
> > - keeps the adjecency of pages in lru;
>
> But this change destroys LRU ordering: at the time when shrink_list()
> inspects PG_activate bit, information about order in which
> mark_page_accessed() was called against pages is lost. E.g., suppose
Thanks.
But this order of re-access time may be pointless. In fact the original
mark_page_accessed() is doing another inversion: inversion of page lifetime.
In the word of CLOCK-Pro, a page first being re-accessed has lower
inter-reference distance, and therefore should be better protected(if ignore
possible read-ahead effects). If we move re-accessed pages immediately into
active_list, we are pushing them closer to danger of eviction.
btw, the current vmscan code clears PG_referenced flag when moving pages to
active_list. I followed the convention by doing this in the patch:
--- linux-2.6.15-rc2-mm1.orig/mm/vmscan.c
+++ linux-2.6.15-rc2-mm1/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -454,6 +454,12 @@ static int shrink_list(struct list_head
if (PageWriteback(page))
goto keep_locked;
+ if (PageActivate(page)) {
+ ClearPageActivate(page);
+ ClearPageReferenced(page);
+ goto activate_locked;
+ }
+
referenced = page_referenced(page, 1, sc->priority <= 0);
/* In active use or really unfreeable? Activate it. */
if (referenced && page_mapping_inuse(page))
Though I have a strong feeling that with the extra PG_activate bit, the
+ ClearPageReferenced(page);
line should be removed. That is, let the extra reference record live through it.
The point is to smooth out the inter-reference distance. Imagine the following
situation:
- + - + + - - + -
1 2 3 4 5
+: reference time
-: shrink_list time
One page have an average inter-reference distance that is smaller than the
inter-scan distance. But the distances vary a bit. Here we'd better let the
reference count accumulate, or at the 3rd shrink_list time it will be evicted.
Though it has a side effect of favoriting non-mmaped file a bit more than
before, and I was not quite sure about it.
> inactive list initially contained pages
>
> /* head */ (P1, P2, P3) /* tail */
>
> all of them referenced. Then mark_page_accessed(), is called against P1,
> P2, and P3 (in that order). With the old code active list would end up
>
> /* head */ (P3, P2, P1) /* tail */
>
> which corresponds to LRU. With delayed page activation, pages are moved
> to head of the active list in the order they are analyzed by
> shrink_list(), which gives
>
> /* head */ (P1, P2, P3) /* tail */
>
> on the active list, that is _inverse_ LRU order.
Thanks,
Wu
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-12-04 13:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-12-03 7:14 [PATCH 00/16] Adaptive read-ahead V9 Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 01/16] mm: delayed page activation Wu Fengguang
2005-12-04 12:11 ` Nikita Danilov
2005-12-04 13:48 ` Wu Fengguang [this message]
2005-12-04 15:03 ` Nikita Danilov
2005-12-04 15:37 ` Help!Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer tony
2005-12-04 19:10 ` [PATCH 01/16] mm: delayed page activation Peter Zijlstra
2005-12-05 1:48 ` Wu Fengguang
2005-12-06 17:55 ` Nikita Danilov
2005-12-07 1:42 ` Wu Fengguang
2005-12-07 9:46 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-07 10:36 ` Wu Fengguang
2005-12-07 12:44 ` Nikita Danilov
2005-12-07 13:53 ` Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 02/16] radixtree: sync with mainline Wu Fengguang
2005-12-04 23:57 ` Andrew Morton
2005-12-05 1:43 ` Wu Fengguang
2005-12-05 4:05 ` Wu Fengguang
2005-12-05 17:22 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-12-05 10:44 ` Wu Fengguang
2005-12-05 17:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2005-12-06 2:23 ` Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 03/16] radixtree: look-aside cache Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 04/16] readahead: some preparation Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 05/16] readahead: call scheme Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 06/16] readahead: parameters Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 07/16] readahead: state based method Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 08/16] readahead: context " Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 09/16] readahead: read-around method for mmap file Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 10/16] readahead: other methods Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 11/16] readahead: detect and rescue live pages Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 12/16] readahead: events accounting Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 13/16] readahead: laptop mode support Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 14/16] readahead: disable look-ahead for loopback file Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:14 ` [PATCH 15/16] readahead: nfsd support Wu Fengguang
2005-12-03 7:15 ` [PATCH 16/16] io: prevent too much latency in the read-ahead code Wu Fengguang
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-11-09 13:49 [PATCH 00/16] Adaptive read-ahead V7 Wu Fengguang
2005-11-09 13:49 ` [PATCH 01/16] mm: delayed page activation Wu Fengguang
2005-11-10 0:21 ` Nick Piggin
2005-11-10 3:15 ` Wu Fengguang
2005-11-10 9:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2005-11-10 10:30 ` Wu Fengguang
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20051204134818.GA4305@mail.ustc.edu.cn \
--to=wfg@mail.ustc.edu.cn \
--cc=Linux-Kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=nikita@clusterfs.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome