lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 1/6] mm/page_idle: Add per-pid idle page tracking using virtual index
On Tue 13-08-19 10:45:17, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 04:14:32PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [snip]
> > > > If the API is flawed then this is likely going
> > > > to kick us later and will be hard to fix. I am still not convinced about
> > > > the swap part of the thing TBH.
> > >
> > > Ok, then let us discuss it. As I mentioned before, without this we lose the
> > > access information due to MADVISE or swapping. Minchan and Konstantin both
> > > suggested it that's why I also added it (other than me also realizing that it
> > > is neeed).
> >
> > I have described my concerns about the general idle bit behavior after
> > unmapping pointing to discrepancy with !anon pages. And I believe those
> > haven't been addressed yet.
>
> You are referring to this post right?
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/8/6/637
>
> Specifically your question was:
> How are you going to handle situation when the page is unmapped and refaulted again (e.g. a normal reclaim of a pagecache)?
>
> Currently I don't know how to implement that. Would it work if I stored the
> page-idle bit information in the pte of the file page (after the page is
> unmapped by reclaim?).

It would work as long as we keep page tables around after unmap. As they
are easily reconstructable this is a good candidate for reclaim as well.

> Also, this could be a future extension - the Android heap profiler does not
> need it right now. I know that's not a good argument but it is useful to say
> that it doesn't affect a real world usecase.. the swap issue on the other
> hand, is a real usecase. Since the profiler should not get affected by
> swapping or MADVISE_COLD hints.
>
> > Besides that I am still not seeing any
> > description of the usecase that would suffer from the lack of the
> > functionality in changelogs.
>
> You are talking about the swap usecase? The usecase is well layed out in v5
> 2/6. Did you see it? https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1112283/

For some reason I've missed it. I will coment on that.

--
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-08-13 16:58    [W:0.058 / U:1.244 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site