The patch titled
Subject: mm/swap: make __pagevec_lru_add static
has been added to the -mm mm-unstable branch. Its filename is
mm-swap-make-__pagevec_lru_add-static.patch
This patch will shortly appear at
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/25-new.git/tree/patches/mm-swap-make-__pagevec_lru_add-static.patch
This patch will later appear in the mm-unstable branch at
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
Before you just go and hit "reply", please:
a) Consider who else should be cc'ed
b) Prefer to cc a suitable mailing list as well
c) Ideally: find the original patch on the mailing list and do a
reply-to-all to that, adding suitable additional cc's
*** Remember to use Documentation/process/submit-checklist.rst when testing your code ***
The -mm tree is included into linux-next via the mm-everything
branch at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/akpm/mm
and is updated there every 2-3 working days
------------------------------------------------------
From: "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: mm/swap: make __pagevec_lru_add static
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2022 18:50:01 +0100
__pagevec_lru_add has no callers outside swap.c, so make it static,
and move it to a more logical position in the file.
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20220617175020.717127-4-willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/linux/pagevec.h | 1
mm/swap.c | 126 +++++++++++++++++++-------------------
2 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)
--- a/include/linux/pagevec.h~mm-swap-make-__pagevec_lru_add-static
+++ a/include/linux/pagevec.h
@@ -26,7 +26,6 @@ struct pagevec {
};
void __pagevec_release(struct pagevec *pvec);
-void __pagevec_lru_add(struct pagevec *pvec);
unsigned pagevec_lookup_range(struct pagevec *pvec,
struct address_space *mapping,
pgoff_t *start, pgoff_t end);
--- a/mm/swap.c~mm-swap-make-__pagevec_lru_add-static
+++ a/mm/swap.c
@@ -228,6 +228,69 @@ static bool pagevec_add_and_need_flush(s
typedef void (*move_fn_t)(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio);
+static void __pagevec_lru_add_fn(struct folio *folio, struct lruvec *lruvec)
+{
+ int was_unevictable = folio_test_clear_unevictable(folio);
+ long nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio);
+
+ VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_lru(folio), folio);
+
+ folio_set_lru(folio);
+ /*
+ * Is an smp_mb__after_atomic() still required here, before
+ * folio_evictable() tests PageMlocked, to rule out the possibility
+ * of stranding an evictable folio on an unevictable LRU? I think
+ * not, because __munlock_page() only clears PageMlocked while the LRU
+ * lock is held.
+ *
+ * (That is not true of __page_cache_release(), and not necessarily
+ * true of release_pages(): but those only clear PageMlocked after
+ * put_page_testzero() has excluded any other users of the page.)
+ */
+ if (folio_evictable(folio)) {
+ if (was_unevictable)
+ __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGRESCUED, nr_pages);
+ } else {
+ folio_clear_active(folio);
+ folio_set_unevictable(folio);
+ /*
+ * folio->mlock_count = !!folio_test_mlocked(folio)?
+ * But that leaves __mlock_page() in doubt whether another
+ * actor has already counted the mlock or not. Err on the
+ * safe side, underestimate, let page reclaim fix it, rather
+ * than leaving a page on the unevictable LRU indefinitely.
+ */
+ folio->mlock_count = 0;
+ if (!was_unevictable)
+ __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGCULLED, nr_pages);
+ }
+
+ lruvec_add_folio(lruvec, folio);
+ trace_mm_lru_insertion(folio);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Add the passed pages to the LRU, then drop the caller's refcount
+ * on them. Reinitialises the caller's pagevec.
+ */
+static void __pagevec_lru_add(struct pagevec *pvec)
+{
+ int i;
+ struct lruvec *lruvec = NULL;
+ unsigned long flags = 0;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < pagevec_count(pvec); i++) {
+ struct folio *folio = page_folio(pvec->pages[i]);
+
+ lruvec = folio_lruvec_relock_irqsave(folio, lruvec, &flags);
+ __pagevec_lru_add_fn(folio, lruvec);
+ }
+ if (lruvec)
+ unlock_page_lruvec_irqrestore(lruvec, flags);
+ release_pages(pvec->pages, pvec->nr);
+ pagevec_reinit(pvec);
+}
+
static void folio_batch_move_lru(struct folio_batch *fbatch, move_fn_t move_fn)
{
int i;
@@ -1036,69 +1099,6 @@ void __pagevec_release(struct pagevec *p
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(__pagevec_release);
-static void __pagevec_lru_add_fn(struct folio *folio, struct lruvec *lruvec)
-{
- int was_unevictable = folio_test_clear_unevictable(folio);
- long nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio);
-
- VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_lru(folio), folio);
-
- folio_set_lru(folio);
- /*
- * Is an smp_mb__after_atomic() still required here, before
- * folio_evictable() tests PageMlocked, to rule out the possibility
- * of stranding an evictable folio on an unevictable LRU? I think
- * not, because __munlock_page() only clears PageMlocked while the LRU
- * lock is held.
- *
- * (That is not true of __page_cache_release(), and not necessarily
- * true of release_pages(): but those only clear PageMlocked after
- * put_page_testzero() has excluded any other users of the page.)
- */
- if (folio_evictable(folio)) {
- if (was_unevictable)
- __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGRESCUED, nr_pages);
- } else {
- folio_clear_active(folio);
- folio_set_unevictable(folio);
- /*
- * folio->mlock_count = !!folio_test_mlocked(folio)?
- * But that leaves __mlock_page() in doubt whether another
- * actor has already counted the mlock or not. Err on the
- * safe side, underestimate, let page reclaim fix it, rather
- * than leaving a page on the unevictable LRU indefinitely.
- */
- folio->mlock_count = 0;
- if (!was_unevictable)
- __count_vm_events(UNEVICTABLE_PGCULLED, nr_pages);
- }
-
- lruvec_add_folio(lruvec, folio);
- trace_mm_lru_insertion(folio);
-}
-
-/*
- * Add the passed pages to the LRU, then drop the caller's refcount
- * on them. Reinitialises the caller's pagevec.
- */
-void __pagevec_lru_add(struct pagevec *pvec)
-{
- int i;
- struct lruvec *lruvec = NULL;
- unsigned long flags = 0;
-
- for (i = 0; i < pagevec_count(pvec); i++) {
- struct folio *folio = page_folio(pvec->pages[i]);
-
- lruvec = folio_lruvec_relock_irqsave(folio, lruvec, &flags);
- __pagevec_lru_add_fn(folio, lruvec);
- }
- if (lruvec)
- unlock_page_lruvec_irqrestore(lruvec, flags);
- release_pages(pvec->pages, pvec->nr);
- pagevec_reinit(pvec);
-}
-
/**
* folio_batch_remove_exceptionals() - Prune non-folios from a batch.
* @fbatch: The batch to prune
_
Patches currently in -mm which might be from willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx are
mm-add-vma-iterator.patch
mmap-use-the-vma-iterator-in-count_vma_pages_range.patch
proc-remove-vma-rbtree-use-from-nommu.patch
arm64-remove-mmap-linked-list-from-vdso.patch
parisc-remove-mmap-linked-list-from-cache-handling.patch
powerpc-remove-mmap-linked-list-walks.patch
s390-remove-vma-linked-list-walks.patch
x86-remove-vma-linked-list-walks.patch
xtensa-remove-vma-linked-list-walks.patch
cxl-remove-vma-linked-list-walk.patch
optee-remove-vma-linked-list-walk.patch
um-remove-vma-linked-list-walk.patch
coredump-remove-vma-linked-list-walk.patch
exec-use-vma-iterator-instead-of-linked-list.patch
fs-proc-task_mmu-stop-using-linked-list-and-highest_vm_end.patch
acct-use-vma-iterator-instead-of-linked-list.patch
perf-use-vma-iterator.patch
sched-use-maple-tree-iterator-to-walk-vmas.patch
fork-use-vma-iterator.patch
mm-khugepaged-stop-using-vma-linked-list.patch
mm-ksm-use-vma-iterators-instead-of-vma-linked-list.patch
mm-mlock-use-vma-iterator-and-maple-state-instead-of-vma-linked-list.patch
mm-pagewalk-use-vma_find-instead-of-vma-linked-list.patch
i915-use-the-vma-iterator.patch
nommu-remove-uses-of-vma-linked-list.patch
mm-vmscan-convert-reclaim_clean_pages_from_list-to-folios.patch
mm-vmscan-convert-isolate_lru_pages-to-use-a-folio.patch
mm-vmscan-convert-move_pages_to_lru-to-use-a-folio.patch
mm-vmscan-convert-shrink_active_list-to-use-a-folio.patch
mm-vmscan-convert-reclaim_pages-to-use-a-folio.patch
mm-add-folios_put.patch
mm-swap-add-folio_batch_move_lru.patch
mm-swap-make-__pagevec_lru_add-static.patch
mm-swap-convert-lru_add-to-a-folio_batch.patch
mm-swap-convert-lru_deactivate_file-to-a-folio_batch.patch
mm-swap-convert-lru_deactivate-to-a-folio_batch.patch
mm-swap-convert-lru_lazyfree-to-a-folio_batch.patch
mm-swap-convert-activate_page-to-a-folio_batch.patch
mm-swap-rename-lru_pvecs-to-cpu_fbatches.patch
mm-swap-pull-the-cpu-conditional-out-of-__lru_add_drain_all.patch
mm-swap-optimise-lru_add_drain_cpu.patch
mm-swap-convert-try_to_free_swap-to-use-a-folio.patch
mm-swap-convert-release_pages-to-use-a-folio-internally.patch
mm-swap-convert-put_pages_list-to-use-folios.patch
mm-swap-convert-__put_page-to-__folio_put.patch
mm-swap-convert-__put_single_page-to-__folio_put_small.patch
mm-swap-convert-__put_compound_page-to-__folio_put_large.patch
mm-swap-convert-__page_cache_release-to-use-a-folio.patch
mm-convert-destroy_compound_page-to-destroy_large_folio.patch
mm-convert-page_swap_flags-to-folio_swap_flags.patch
mm-swap-convert-delete_from_swap_cache-to-take-a-folio.patch
mm-swap-convert-__delete_from_swap_cache-to-a-folio.patch
