From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1755728Ab0IGB1O (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 6 Sep 2010 21:27:14 -0400
Received: from TYO201.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.193]:37275 "EHLO
	tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755502Ab0IGB1K (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 6 Sep 2010 21:27:10 -0400
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 10:25:23 +0900
From: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>,
        Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
        "Jun'ichi Nomura" <j-nomura@ce.jp.nec.com>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] hugetlb: hugepage migration core
Message-ID: <20100907012522.GA7672@spritzera.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp>
References: <1283488658-23137-1-git-send-email-n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>
 <1283488658-23137-5-git-send-email-n-horiguchi@ah.jp.nec.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.00.1009030907080.5633@router.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-2022-jp
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1009030907080.5633@router.home>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-12-10)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 09:10:03AM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Sep 2010, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> 
> > diff --git v2.6.36-rc2/mm/vmscan.c v2.6.36-rc2/mm/vmscan.c
> > index c391c32..69ce2a3 100644
> > --- v2.6.36-rc2/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ v2.6.36-rc2/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
> >  #include <linux/memcontrol.h>
> >  #include <linux/delayacct.h>
> >  #include <linux/sysctl.h>
> > +#include <linux/hugetlb.h>
> >
> >  #include <asm/tlbflush.h>
> >  #include <asm/div64.h>
> > @@ -508,6 +509,10 @@ void putback_lru_page(struct page *page)
> >
> >  	VM_BUG_ON(PageLRU(page));
> >
> > +	if (PageHuge(page)) {
> > +		put_page(page);
> > +		return;
> > +	}
> >  redo:
> >  	ClearPageUnevictable(page);
> >
> > @@ -1112,7 +1117,9 @@ int isolate_lru_page(struct page *page)
> >  {
> >  	int ret = -EBUSY;
> >
> > -	if (PageLRU(page)) {
> > +	if (PageHuge(page) && get_page_unless_zero(compound_head(page)))
> > +		ret = 0;
> > +	else if (PageLRU(page)) {
> >  		struct zone *zone = page_zone(page);
> >
> >  		spin_lock_irq(&zone->lru_lock);
> >
> 
> Huge pages are not on the LRU right?

Yes.

> So why use the lru functions for
> them and then not use the lru? Its a bit stranger. The caller must aware
> of the different handling of huge pages since there is no toying around
> with the lru. So just have the caller do a put or get page instead.

So, you mean we should copy migrate_huge_pages() from migrate_pages() and
make two changes on new function
  1. unmap_and_move() -> unmap_and_move_huge_page()
  2. putback_lru_pages() -> put_page()
, right?

Thanks,
Naoya Horiguchi