From: Zhang Peng <zippermonkey@icloud.com>
To: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Zhang Peng <zippermonkey@icloud.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
Yuanchu Xie <yuanchu@google.com>, Wei Xu <weixugc@google.com>,
Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@linux.dev>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>,
Zhang Peng <bruzzhang@tencent.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] mm/vmscan: extract pageout_one() from shrink_folio_list()
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2026 22:46:46 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260920144647.43333-1-zippermonkey@icloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGsJ_4zOfR3Rn5tk_RcOWUDmREO1JyRwXA15Vr3aeUs=+ybMMA@mail.gmail.com>
[Resending this one on its own - my first attempt accidentally sent
all four replies concatenated into a single mail, see
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260920143816.39827-1-zippermonkey@icloud.com/
Sorry for the noise.]
On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 5:49 AM Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Also, this patch looks basically good, just like the previous one.
> Could we also avoid hiding the activation semantics in the inner
> function? It would be clearer to make the activation semantics
> explicit at the outer level, so readers don't have to dig into a
> deep internal function to realize that a folio may take the
> activation path.
>
> In LRU, we have two distinct possibilities: activate a folio or just
> keep it. This is an important semantic distinction in the LRU logic.
> Hiding the activation decision so deep in an inner function makes
> that semantic much less obvious.
Done, same treatment as 2/5 - the helper reports the decision and the
caller acts on it:
enum folio_pageout_result {
FOLIO_PAGEOUT_KEEP_LOCKED,
FOLIO_PAGEOUT_KEEP_UNLOCKED,
FOLIO_PAGEOUT_ACTIVATE,
FOLIO_PAGEOUT_FREE, /* folio is locked, hand it to
folio_try_reclaim_free() */
};
switch (folio_try_pageout(folio, sc, &ctx, folio_list)) {
case FOLIO_PAGEOUT_ACTIVATE:
goto activate_locked;
case FOLIO_PAGEOUT_KEEP_LOCKED:
goto keep_locked;
case FOLIO_PAGEOUT_KEEP_UNLOCKED:
goto keep;
case FOLIO_PAGEOUT_FREE:
break; /* folio is locked; try to free it below */
}
Two things beyond what you asked for, both because pageout() has more
outcomes than the freeing path does:
- "keep" is split into KEEP_LOCKED and KEEP_UNLOCKED. pageout() can
return with the folio either still locked or already unlocked, and
previously the caller had to know which internal branch it came
from to pick between the keep_locked and keep labels. Now the
result says so.
- FOLIO_PAGEOUT_FREE keeps the "and now try to free it" step at the
outer level too, instead of chaining into folio_try_reclaim_free()
from inside folio_try_pageout().
This patch is in the cleanup-only series, see my reply on 5/5.
Thanks
Zhang Peng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-20 14:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-20 5:07 [PATCH v5 0/5] mm: batch TLB flushing for dirty folios in vmscan Zhang Peng
2026-07-20 5:07 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] mm/vmscan: introduce folio_activate_locked() helper Zhang Peng
2026-08-10 8:36 ` Barry Song
2026-09-20 14:38 ` Zhang Peng
2026-07-20 5:07 ` [PATCH v5 2/5] mm/vmscan: extract folio_free() from shrink_folio_list() Zhang Peng
2026-08-13 21:40 ` Barry Song
2026-09-20 14:45 ` Zhang Peng
2026-07-20 5:07 ` [PATCH v5 3/5] mm/vmscan: extract pageout_one() " Zhang Peng
2026-08-13 21:49 ` Barry Song
2026-09-20 14:46 ` Zhang Peng [this message]
2026-07-20 5:07 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] mm/vmscan: extract folio unmap logic into folio_try_unmap() Zhang Peng
2026-08-13 21:52 ` Barry Song
2026-07-20 5:07 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] mm/vmscan: flush TLB for every 31 folios evictions Zhang Peng
2026-08-13 21:58 ` Barry Song
2026-09-20 14:47 ` Zhang Peng
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=20260920144647.43333-1-zippermonkey@icloud.com \
--to=zippermonkey@icloud.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axelrasmussen@google.com \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=bruzzhang@tencent.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=kasong@tencent.com \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=weixugc@google.com \
--cc=yuanchu@google.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®