On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:16:53 +0900 Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 09:45:19 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Mar 2010 08:54:11 +0900 > > KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:28:55 +0530 > > > Balbir Singh <balbir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > * Andrea Righi <arighi@xxxxxxxxxxx> [2010-03-15 00:26:38]: > > > > > > > > > From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > > > Now, file-mapped is maintaiend. But more generic update function > > > > > will be needed for dirty page accounting. > > > > > > > > > > For accountig page status, we have to guarantee lock_page_cgroup() > > > > > will be never called under tree_lock held. > > > > > To guarantee that, we use trylock at updating status. > > > > > By this, we do fuzzy accounting, but in almost all case, it's correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't like this at all, but in almost all cases is not acceptable > > > > for statistics, since decisions will be made on them and having them > > > > incorrect is really bad. Could we do a form of deferred statistics and > > > > fix this. > > > > > > > > > > plz show your implementation which has no performance regresssion. > > > For me, I don't neee file_mapped accounting, at all. If we can remove that, > > > we can add simple migration lock. > > > file_mapped is a feattue you added. please improve it. > > > > > > > BTW, I should explain how acculate this accounting is in this patch itself. > > > > Now, lock_page_cgroup/unlock_page_cgroup happens when > > - charge/uncharge/migrate/move accounting > > > > Then, the lock contention (trylock failure) seems to occur in conflict > > with > > - charge, uncharge, migarate. move accounting > > > > About dirty accounting, charge/uncharge/migarate are operation in synchronous > > manner with radix-tree (holding treelock etc). Then no account leak. > > move accounting is only source for inacculacy...but I don't think this move-task > > is ciritial....moreover, we don't move any file pages at task-move, now. > > (But Nishimura-san has a plan to do so.) > > So, contention will happen only at confliction with force_empty. > > > > About FILE_MAPPED accounting, it's not synchronous with radix-tree operaton. > > Then, accounting-miss seems to happen when charge/uncharge/migrate/account move. > > But > > charge .... we don't account a page as FILE_MAPPED before it's charged. > > uncharge .. usual operation in turncation is unmap->remove-from-radix-tree. > > Then, it's sequential in almost all case. The race exists when... > > Assume there are 2 threads A and B. A truncate a file, B map/unmap that. > > This is very unusal confliction. > > migrate.... we do try_to_unmap before migrating pages. Then, FILE_MAPPED > > is properly handled. > > move account .... we don't have move-account-mapped-file, yet. > > > FILE_MAPPED is updated under pte lock. OTOH, move account is also done under > pte lock. page cgroup lock is held under pte lock in both cases, so move account > is not so problem as for FILE_MAPPED. > HmmHmm, thank you. then, only racy cases are truncate and force_empty. Thanks, -Kame -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>