[..] > > > > >> + for (i = 0; i < SWAPFILE_CLUSTER; i++) > >> + clear_bit(idx * SWAPFILE_CLUSTER + i, si->zeromap); > > Could you explain why we need to clear the zeromap here? > > > > swap_cluster_schedule_discard() is called from: > > - swap_free_cluster() -> free_cluster() > > > > This is already covered below. > > > > - swap_entry_free() -> dec_cluster_info_page() -> free_cluster() > > > > Each entry in the cluster should have its zeromap bit cleared in > > swap_entry_free() before the entire cluster is free and we call > > free_cluster(). > > > > Am I missing something? > > Yes, it looks like this one is not needed as swap_entry_free and > swap_free_cluster would already have cleared the bit. Will remove it. > > I had initially started checking what codepaths zeromap would need to be > cleared. But then thought I could do it wherever si->swap_map is cleared > or set to SWAP_MAP_BAD, which is why I added it here. > > >> > >> cluster_list_add_tail(&si->discard_clusters, si->cluster_info, idx); > >> > >> @@ -482,7 +491,7 @@ static void __free_cluster(struct swap_info_struct *si, unsigned long idx) > >> static void swap_do_scheduled_discard(struct swap_info_struct *si) > >> { > >> struct swap_cluster_info *info, *ci; > >> - unsigned int idx; > >> + unsigned int idx, i; > >> > >> info = si->cluster_info; > >> > >> @@ -498,6 +507,8 @@ static void swap_do_scheduled_discard(struct swap_info_struct *si) > >> __free_cluster(si, idx); > >> memset(si->swap_map + idx * SWAPFILE_CLUSTER, > >> 0, SWAPFILE_CLUSTER); > >> + for (i = 0; i < SWAPFILE_CLUSTER; i++) > >> + clear_bit(idx * SWAPFILE_CLUSTER + i, si->zeromap); > > Same here. I didn't look into the specific code paths, but shouldn't the > > cluster be unused (and hence its zeromap bits already cleared?). > > > I think this one is needed (or atleast very good to have). There are 2 > paths: > > 1) swap_cluster_schedule_discard (clears zeromap) -> swap_discard_work > -> swap_do_scheduled_discard (clears zeromap) > > Path 1 doesnt need it as swap_cluster_schedule_discard already clears it. > > 2) scan_swap_map_slots -> scan_swap_map_try_ssd_cluster -> > swap_do_scheduled_discard (clears zeromap) > > Path 2 might need it as zeromap isnt cleared earlier I believe > (eventhough I think it might already be 0). Aren't the clusters in the discard list free by definition? It seems like we add a cluster there from swap_cluster_schedule_discard(), which we establish above that it gets called on a free cluster, right? > > Even if its cleared in path 2, I think its good to keep this one, as the > function is swap_do_scheduled_discard, i.e. incase it gets directly > called or si->discard_work gets scheduled anywhere else in the future, > it should do as the function name suggests, i.e. swap discard(clear > zeromap). I think we just set the swap map to SWAP_MAP_BAD in swap_cluster_schedule_discard() and then clear it in swap_do_scheduled_discard(), and the clusters are already freed at that point. Ying could set me straight if I am wrong here. It is confusing to me to keep an unnecessary call tbh, it makes sense to clear zeromap bits once, when the swap entry/cluster is not being used anymore and before it's reallocated. > > >> unlock_cluster(ci); > >> } > >> } > >> @@ -1059,9 +1070,12 @@ static void swap_free_cluster(struct swap_info_struct *si, unsigned long idx) > >> { > >> unsigned long offset = idx * SWAPFILE_CLUSTER; > >> struct swap_cluster_info *ci; > >> + unsigned int i; > >> > >> ci = lock_cluster(si, offset); > >> memset(si->swap_map + offset, 0, SWAPFILE_CLUSTER); > >> + for (i = 0; i < SWAPFILE_CLUSTER; i++) > >> + clear_bit(offset + i, si->zeromap); > >> cluster_set_count_flag(ci, 0, 0); > >> free_cluster(si, idx); > >> unlock_cluster(ci); > >> @@ -1336,6 +1350,7 @@ static void swap_entry_free(struct swap_info_struct *p, swp_entry_t entry) > >> count = p->swap_map[offset]; > >> VM_BUG_ON(count != SWAP_HAS_CACHE); > >> p->swap_map[offset] = 0; > >> + clear_bit(offset, p->zeromap); > > I think instead of clearing the zeromap in swap_free_cluster() and here > > separately, we can just do it in swap_range_free(). I suspect this may > > be the only place we really need to clear the zero in the swapfile code. > > Sure, we could move it to swap_range_free, but then also move the > clearing of swap_map. > > When it comes to clearing zeromap, I think its just generally a good > idea to clear it wherever swap_map is cleared. I am not convinced about this argument. The swap_map is used for multiple reasons beyond just keeping track of whether a swap entry is in-use. The zeromap on the other hand is simpler and just needs to be cleared once when an entry is being freed. Unless others disagree, I prefer to only clear the zeromap once in swap_range_free() and keep the swap_map code as-is for now. If we think there is value in moving clearing the swap_map to swap_range_free(), it should at least be in a separate patch to be evaluated separately. Just my 2c.