| Message ID | 20201117171242.GA120587@rlk (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | mm/lru: simplify is_file_lru() and is_active_lru() | expand |
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:12:42AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > lru_list lru bit 0 can tell whether the list is > avtive lru-list or not. > lru_list lru bit 1 can tell whether the list is > file lru-list or not. > > And fix some define type in shrink_active_list() > and get_scan_count(). > > v1->v2: > correct the commit message, and fix the define type. No, still incorrect.
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:41:17PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:12:42AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > lru_list lru bit 0 can tell whether the list is > > avtive lru-list or not. > > lru_list lru bit 1 can tell whether the list is > > file lru-list or not. > > > > And fix some define type in shrink_active_list() > > and get_scan_count(). > > > > v1->v2: > > correct the commit message, and fix the define type. > > No, still incorrect. I am a little confused, can you tell in detail? Thanks.
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:46:33AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:41:17PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:12:42AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > > lru_list lru bit 0 can tell whether the list is > > > avtive lru-list or not. > > > lru_list lru bit 1 can tell whether the list is > > > file lru-list or not. > > > > > > And fix some define type in shrink_active_list() > > > and get_scan_count(). > > > > > > v1->v2: > > > correct the commit message, and fix the define type. > > > > No, still incorrect. > > I am a little confused, can you tell in detail? Have you booted a kernel with this change? Have you run any kind of tests on it?
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:47:27PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:46:33AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:41:17PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:12:42AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > > > lru_list lru bit 0 can tell whether the list is > > > > avtive lru-list or not. > > > > lru_list lru bit 1 can tell whether the list is > > > > file lru-list or not. > > > > > > > > And fix some define type in shrink_active_list() > > > > and get_scan_count(). > > > > > > > > v1->v2: > > > > correct the commit message, and fix the define type. > > > > > > No, still incorrect. > > > > I am a little confused, can you tell in detail? > > Have you booted a kernel with this change? Have you run any kind of > tests on it? Yes, I boot it with qemu-system-x86_64-4.1.50 on ubuntu20.04: qemu-system-x86_64 -kernel /home/rlk/workspace/compile/out/arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage -hda \ /home/rlk/myspace/qemu_build/rootfs.img -append "root=/dev/sda console=ttyS0" -nographic using the kernel compiled with ubuntu20.04's default .config. It seems nothing abnormal. And i did not do other test.
On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:56:58AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:47:27PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:46:33AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:41:17PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:12:42AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > > > > lru_list lru bit 0 can tell whether the list is > > > > > avtive lru-list or not. > > > > > lru_list lru bit 1 can tell whether the list is > > > > > file lru-list or not. > > > > > > > > > > And fix some define type in shrink_active_list() > > > > > and get_scan_count(). > > > > > > > > > > v1->v2: > > > > > correct the commit message, and fix the define type. > > > > > > > > No, still incorrect. > > > > > > I am a little confused, can you tell in detail? > > > > Have you booted a kernel with this change? Have you run any kind of > > tests on it? > > Yes, I boot it with qemu-system-x86_64-4.1.50 on ubuntu20.04: > qemu-system-x86_64 -kernel /home/rlk/workspace/compile/out/arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage -hda \ > /home/rlk/myspace/qemu_build/rootfs.img -append "root=/dev/sda console=ttyS0" -nographic > > using the kernel compiled with ubuntu20.04's default .config. > > It seems nothing abnormal. > And i did not do other test. Maybe you should ... how about LTP? I think that's pretty straightforward to set up and run.
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:59:00PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:56:58AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:47:27PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:46:33AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:41:17PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:12:42AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > > > > > lru_list lru bit 0 can tell whether the list is > > > > > > avtive lru-list or not. > > > > > > lru_list lru bit 1 can tell whether the list is > > > > > > file lru-list or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > And fix some define type in shrink_active_list() > > > > > > and get_scan_count(). > > > > > > > > > > > > v1->v2: > > > > > > correct the commit message, and fix the define type. > > > > > > > > > > No, still incorrect. > > > > > > > > I am a little confused, can you tell in detail? > > > > > > Have you booted a kernel with this change? Have you run any kind of > > > tests on it? > > > > Yes, I boot it with qemu-system-x86_64-4.1.50 on ubuntu20.04: > > qemu-system-x86_64 -kernel /home/rlk/workspace/compile/out/arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage -hda \ > > /home/rlk/myspace/qemu_build/rootfs.img -append "root=/dev/sda console=ttyS0" -nographic > > > > using the kernel compiled with ubuntu20.04's default .config. > > > > It seems nothing abnormal. > > And i did not do other test. > > Maybe you should ... how about LTP? I think that's pretty straightforward > to set up and run. Thanks for your advice, Matthew. I will set up an ltp test envirment, thanks again. And Please ignore this change for now.
On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:59:00PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:56:58AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:47:27PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:46:33AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > > > On Tue, Nov 17, 2020 at 05:41:17PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 01:12:42AM +0800, Hui Su wrote: > > > > > > lru_list lru bit 0 can tell whether the list is > > > > > > avtive lru-list or not. > > > > > > lru_list lru bit 1 can tell whether the list is > > > > > > file lru-list or not. > > > > > > > > > > > > And fix some define type in shrink_active_list() > > > > > > and get_scan_count(). > > > > > > > > > > > > v1->v2: > > > > > > correct the commit message, and fix the define type. > > > > > > > > > > No, still incorrect. > > > > > > > > I am a little confused, can you tell in detail? > > > > > > Have you booted a kernel with this change? Have you run any kind of > > > tests on it? > > > > Yes, I boot it with qemu-system-x86_64-4.1.50 on ubuntu20.04: > > qemu-system-x86_64 -kernel /home/rlk/workspace/compile/out/arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage -hda \ > > /home/rlk/myspace/qemu_build/rootfs.img -append "root=/dev/sda console=ttyS0" -nographic > > > > using the kernel compiled with ubuntu20.04's default .config. > > > > It seems nothing abnormal. > > And i did not do other test. > > Maybe you should ... how about LTP? I think that's pretty straightforward > to set up and run. Hi Matthew: Thanks for your advice, i finally setup a test platform powered by jenkins and QEMU emulator version 4.2.1 with two evening. This is the things that i always wanted to do but didn't do. I apply this change based on the commit: 4d02da974ea8, and compile it with x86_64_defconfig: make bzImage O=/var/lib/jenkins/workspace/linux_kernel_ltp/out/ Then start qemu: sudo qemu-system-x86_64 \ -kernel /var/lib/jenkins/workspace/linux_kernel_ltp/out/arch/x86/boot/bzImage \ -hda /home/ubuntu/myspace/qemu_build/ubuntu.img \ -hdb /home/ubuntu/myspace/qemu_build/init.img \ -append "root=/dev/sda console=ttyS0" \ -nographic \ -m 1024 \ -fsdev local,id=fs1,path=/home/ubuntu/workspace,security_model=none \ -device virtio-9p-pci,fsdev=fs1,mount_tag=jeff-host-code Then run the ltp test: sudo bash /opt/ltp/runltp -f mm The result is: Test Start Time: Sat Nov 21 02:06:46 2020 ----------------------------------------- Testcase Result Exit Value -------- ------ ---------- mm01 PASS 0 mm02 PASS 0 mtest01 PASS 0 mtest01w PASS 0 mtest05 PASS 0 mtest06 FAIL 2 mtest06_2 PASS 0 mtest06_3 PASS 0 mem02 PASS 0 mmapstress01 PASS 0 mmapstress02 PASS 0 mmapstress03 PASS 0 mmapstress04 PASS 0 mmapstress05 PASS 0 mmapstress06 PASS 0 mmapstress07 PASS 0 mmapstress08 PASS 0 mmapstress09 PASS 0 mmapstress10 PASS 0 mmap10 PASS 0 mmap10_1 PASS 0 mmap10_2 CONF 32 mmap10_3 CONF 32 mmap10_4 CONF 32 ksm01 CONF 32 ksm01_1 CONF 32 ksm02 CONF 32 ksm02_1 CONF 32 ksm03 CONF 32 ksm03_1 CONF 32 ksm04 CONF 32 ksm04_1 CONF 32 ksm05 CONF 32 ksm06 CONF 32 thp02 CONF 32 thp03 CONF 32 thp04 CONF 32 vma01 PASS 0 vma02 CONF 32 vma03 CONF 32 vma04 CONF 32 vma05 CONF 32 overcommit_memory01 PASS 0 overcommit_memory02 CONF 32 overcommit_memory03 PASS 0 overcommit_memory04 PASS 0 overcommit_memory05 PASS 0 overcommit_memory06 PASS 0 max_map_count PASS 0 min_free_kbytes PASS 0 ----------------------------------------------- Total Tests: 76 Total Skipped Tests: 29 Total Failures: 1 Kernel Version: 5.10.0-rc4+ Machine Architecture: x86_64 Hostname: ubuntu The one failure happens without my change, too.(maybe my config is not correct? I am not sure). Last, i think this change have no problem. And what's your opinions, Matthew. Thanks.
diff --git a/include/linux/mmzone.h b/include/linux/mmzone.h index fb3bf696c05e..294369c652d0 100644 --- a/include/linux/mmzone.h +++ b/include/linux/mmzone.h @@ -258,12 +258,12 @@ enum lru_list { static inline bool is_file_lru(enum lru_list lru) { - return (lru == LRU_INACTIVE_FILE || lru == LRU_ACTIVE_FILE); + return lru & LRU_FILE; } static inline bool is_active_lru(enum lru_list lru) { - return (lru == LRU_ACTIVE_ANON || lru == LRU_ACTIVE_FILE); + return lru & LRU_ACTIVE; } #define ANON_AND_FILE 2 diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c index 7b4e31eac2cf..7d8ea2fc87fc 100644 --- a/mm/vmscan.c +++ b/mm/vmscan.c @@ -2020,7 +2020,7 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned long nr_to_scan, struct page *page; unsigned nr_deactivate, nr_activate; unsigned nr_rotated = 0; - int file = is_file_lru(lru); + bool file = is_file_lru(lru); struct pglist_data *pgdat = lruvec_pgdat(lruvec); lru_add_drain(); @@ -2323,7 +2323,7 @@ static void get_scan_count(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct scan_control *sc, denominator = ap + fp; out: for_each_evictable_lru(lru) { - int file = is_file_lru(lru); + bool file = is_file_lru(lru); unsigned long lruvec_size; unsigned long scan; unsigned long protection;
lru_list lru bit 0 can tell whether the list is avtive lru-list or not. lru_list lru bit 1 can tell whether the list is file lru-list or not. And fix some define type in shrink_active_list() and get_scan_count(). v1->v2: correct the commit message, and fix the define type. Signed-off-by: Hui Su <sh_def@163.com> --- include/linux/mmzone.h | 4 ++-- mm/vmscan.c | 4 ++-- 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)