Yang Shi <yang....@linux.alibaba.com> writes:
> On 5/9/19 7:12 PM, Huang, Ying wrote:
>> Yang Shi <yang....@linux.alibaba.com> writes:
>>
>>> Since commit bd4c82c22c36 ("mm, THP, swap: delay splitting THP after
>>> swapped out"), THP can be swapped out in a whole. But, nr_reclaimed
>>> still gets inc'ed by one even though a whole THP (512 pages) gets
>>> swapped out.
>>>
>>> This doesn't make too much sense to memory reclaim. For example, direct
>>> reclaim may just need reclaim SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX pages, reclaiming one THP
>>> could fulfill it. But, if nr_reclaimed is not increased correctly,
>>> direct reclaim may just waste time to reclaim more pages,
>>> SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX * 512 pages in worst case.
>>>
>>> This change may result in more reclaimed pages than scanned pages showed
>>> by /proc/vmstat since scanning one head page would reclaim 512 base pages.
>>>
>>> Cc: "Huang, Ying" <ying.hu...@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Johannes Weiner <han...@cmpxchg.org>
>>> Cc: Michal Hocko <mho...@suse.com>
>>> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgor...@techsingularity.net>
>>> Cc: "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hu...@google.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang....@linux.alibaba.com>
>>> ---
>>> I'm not quite sure if it was the intended behavior or just omission. I tried
>>> to dig into the review history, but didn't find any clue. I may miss some
>>> discussion.
>>>
>>> mm/vmscan.c | 6 +++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
>>> index fd9de50..7e026ec 100644
>>> --- a/mm/vmscan.c
>>> +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
>>> @@ -1446,7 +1446,11 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct
>>> list_head *page_list,
>>> unlock_page(page);
>>> free_it:
>>> - nr_reclaimed++;
>>> + /*
>>> + * THP may get swapped out in a whole, need account
>>> + * all base pages.
>>> + */
>>> + nr_reclaimed += (1 << compound_order(page));
>>> /*
>>> * Is there need to periodically free_page_list? It would
>> Good catch! Thanks!
>>
>> How about to change this to
>>
>>
>> nr_reclaimed += hpage_nr_pages(page);
>
> Either is fine to me. Is this faster than "1 << compound_order(page)"?
I think the readability is a little better. And this will become
nr_reclaimed += 1
if CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUAGEPAGE is disabled.
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Huang, Ying
