Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: Ensure that mark_page_accessed moves pages to the active list

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 04/29/2013 12:31 PM, Mel Gorman wrote:

A PageActive page is now added to the inactivate list.

While this looks strange, I think it is sufficiently harmless that additional
barriers to address the case is not justified.  Unfortunately, while I never
witnessed it myself, these parallel updates potentially trigger defensive
DEBUG_VM checks on PageActive and hence they are removed by this patch.

Could this not cause issues with __page_cache_release, called from
munmap, exit, truncate, etc.?

Could the eventual skewing of active vs inactive numbers break page
reclaim heuristics?

I wonder if we would need to move to a scheme where the PG_active bit
is always the authoritive one, and we never pass an overriding "lru"
parameter to __pagevec_lru_add.

Would memory ordering between SetPageLRU and testing for PageLRU be
enough to then prevent the statistics from going off?

--
All rights reversed
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux