On Sun, 25 Feb 2024 04:01:40 +0800 Barry Song <21cnbao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 3:07 AM SeongJae Park <sj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Barry,
> >
> > On Sat, 24 Feb 2024 12:37:59 +0800 Barry Song <21cnbao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > >
> > > BTW，
> > > Hi SeongJae,
> > > I am not quite sure if damon also needs this, so I have kept damon as is by
> > > setting ignore_references = false. MADV_PAGEOUT is an explicit hint users
> > > don't want the memory to be reclaimed, I don't know if it is true for damon as
> > > well. If you have some comments, please chime in.
> >
> > Thank you for calling my name :)
> >
> > For DAMON's usecase, the document simply says the behavior would be same to
> > MADV_PAGEOUT, so if we conclude to change MADV_PAGEOUT, I think same change
> > should be made for DAMON's usecase, or update DAMON document.
>
> Hi SeongJae,
>
> I don't find similar clearing pte young in damon_pa_pageout(), so i
> guess damon's
> behaviour is actually different with MADV_PAGEOUT which has pte-clearing. damon
> is probably the best-effort but MADV_PAGEOUT isn't .
>
> static unsigned long damon_pa_pageout(struct damon_region *r, struct damos *s)
> {
> unsigned long addr, applied;
> LIST_HEAD(folio_list);
>
> for (addr = r->ar.start; addr < r->ar.end; addr += PAGE_SIZE) {
> struct folio *folio = damon_get_folio(PHYS_PFN(addr));
> ....
>
> if (damos_pa_filter_out(s, folio))
> goto put_folio;
>
> folio_clear_referenced(folio);
> folio_test_clear_young(folio);
> if (!folio_isolate_lru(folio))
> goto put_folio;
> if (folio_test_unevictable(folio))
> folio_putback_lru(folio);
> else
> list_add(&folio->lru, &folio_list);
> put_folio:
> folio_put(folio);
> }
> applied = reclaim_pages(&folio_list);
> cond_resched();
> return applied * PAGE_SIZE;
> }
>
> am i missing something?
Thank you for checking this again. You're right.
Technically speaking, DAMON's usage of MADV_PAGEOUT is in vaddr.c. paddr.c is
using not MADV_PAGEOUT but reclaim_pages(). Usage of reclaim_pages() from
paddr is different from that of MADV_PAGEOUT since paddr doesn't clear PTE. I
was confused from the difference between vaddr and paddr. I actually wanted to
document the difference but haven't had a time for that yet. Thank you for
letting me remind this.
So, your change on MADV_PAGEOUT will make an effect to vaddr, and I think it's
ok. Your change on reclaim_pages() could make an effect to paddr, depending on
the additional parameter's value. I now think it would better to make no
effect here. That is, let's keep the change for paddr.c in your patch as is.
Thanks,
SJ
>
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > SJ
> >
>
> Thanks
> Barry
