On Mon, 5 Mar 2012, Daisuke Nishimura wrote:
> Hi, Horiguchi-san.
> On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 15:35:08 -0500
> Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Currently charge on shared anonyous pages is supposed not to moved
> > in task migration. To implement this, we need to check that mapcount > 1,
> > instread of > 2. So this patch fixes it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > mm/memcontrol.c | 2 +-
> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git linux-next-20120228.orig/mm/memcontrol.c linux-next-20120228/mm/memcontrol.c
> > index b6d1bab..785f6d3 100644
> > --- linux-next-20120228.orig/mm/memcontrol.c
> > +++ linux-next-20120228/mm/memcontrol.c
> > @@ -5102,7 +5102,7 @@ static struct page *mc_handle_present_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > return NULL;
> > if (PageAnon(page)) {
> > /* we don't move shared anon */
> > - if (!move_anon() || page_mapcount(page) > 2)
> > + if (!move_anon() || page_mapcount(page) > 1)
> > return NULL;
> > } else if (!move_file())
> > /* we ignore mapcount for file pages */
> > --
> > 1.7.7.6
> >
> Sorry, it's my fault..
> Thank you for catching this.
>
> Reviewed-by: Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
I'm perversely sorry to see this fix already wing its way into 3.3-rc,
but never mind.
I was puzzling over that same "> 2" test when thinking through the
stats move locking, and again when swap accounting appeared to be
broken through and through (now fixed by two-liner in page_cgroup.c).
Why is there any test on page_mapcount(page) there at all?
2.6.34 comments it
* TODO: We don't move charges of shared(used by multiple
* processes) pages for now.
as if it's an unwelcome restriction to be eliminated later.
I don't understand why it was ever there, and would like to remove
it (and update the Documentation file) - just to remove a little
unnecessary complication, including mem_cgroup_count_swap_user().
The file case moves account, even when the page is not mapped into
this address space, even when it's mapped into a thousand others.
Why treat the anonymous so differently here? I'd have thought it
quite likely (by no means certain, but quite likely) that when you
move a task sharing an anon page from one cg to another, you'll
move the other task(s) sharing it immediately after - strange that
these shared pages should then get left behind.
I was pleased by the "> 2" bug, there almost all the life of
move_charge_at_immigrate, demonstrating that nobody was depending
upon the documented behaviour.
I've a few more cleanups in the swap accounting area, I guess I
should just post this change along with them and we discuss then,
unless you can enlighten me what it's about before I get there.
Thanks,
Hugh
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>