On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 05:43:20PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 25-07-14 11:26:54, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 11:02:57AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Thu 24-07-14 10:46:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Wed 23-07-14 17:02:41, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > [...]
On Fri 25-07-14 11:26:54, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 11:02:57AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Thu 24-07-14 10:46:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Wed 23-07-14 17:02:41, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > [...]
> > > We can reduce the lookup only to lruvec==true case, no?
> >
> >
On Thu, Jul 24, 2014 at 11:02:57AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Thu 24-07-14 10:46:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 23-07-14 17:02:41, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> [...]
> > We can reduce the lookup only to lruvec==true case, no?
>
> Dohh
> s@can@should@
>
> newpage shouldn't charged in all othe
On Thu 24-07-14 10:46:44, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 23-07-14 17:02:41, Johannes Weiner wrote:
[...]
> We can reduce the lookup only to lruvec==true case, no?
Dohh
s@can@should@
newpage shouldn't charged in all other cases and it would be bug.
Or am I missing something?
> Acked-by: Michal Hock
On Wed 23-07-14 17:02:41, Johannes Weiner wrote:
[...]
> From 2c3525cb556313936845a7c57f4c4adc655b6680 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Johannes Weiner
> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 15:00:15 -0400
> Subject: [patch] mm: memcontrol: rewrite uncharge API fix - page cache
> migration 2
>
> In case of fu
Hi Miklos,
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 08:08:57PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > Can the new page be anything else than previous page cache?
>
> It could be an ordinary pipe buffer too. Stealable as well (see
> generic_pipe_buf_steal()).
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Can the new page be anything else than previous page cache?
It could be an ordinary pipe buffer too. Stealable as well (see
generic_pipe_buf_steal()).
Thanks,
Miklos
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kern
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 05:19:09PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 23-07-14 11:06:08, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:38:47PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > OK, thanks for the clarification. I had this feeling but couldn't wrap
> > > my head around the indirectio
On Wed 23-07-14 11:06:08, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:38:47PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > OK, thanks for the clarification. I had this feeling but couldn't wrap
> > my head around the indirection of the code.
> >
> > It seems that checkig PageCgroupUsed(new) and ba
On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 04:38:47PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 22-07-14 17:44:43, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Sat 19-07-14 13:39:11, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > >> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 05:12:54PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> >
On Tue 22-07-14 17:44:43, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Sat 19-07-14 13:39:11, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> >> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 05:12:54PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> >> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Johannes Weiner
> >> > wrote:
>
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 5:08 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Sat 19-07-14 13:39:11, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 05:12:54PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Johannes Weiner
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > > I assumed the source page would always be new,
On Sat 19-07-14 13:39:11, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 05:12:54PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> >
> > > I assumed the source page would always be new, according to this part
> > > in fuse_try_move_page():
> > >
> > >
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 05:12:54PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
>
> > I assumed the source page would always be new, according to this part
> > in fuse_try_move_page():
> >
> > /*
> > * This is a new and locked page, it sh
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 4:45 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> I assumed the source page would always be new, according to this part
> in fuse_try_move_page():
>
> /*
> * This is a new and locked page, it shouldn't be mapped or
> * have any special flags on it
> */
>
Hi Michal,
[cc'ing Miklos for fuse's use of replace_page_cache()]
On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 09:12:46AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 15-07-14 14:19:35, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [...]
> > > +/**
> > > + * mem_cgroup_migrate - migrate a charge to another page
> > > + * @oldpage: currently charge
On Tue 15-07-14 14:19:35, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > +/**
> > + * mem_cgroup_migrate - migrate a charge to another page
> > + * @oldpage: currently charged page
> > + * @newpage: page to transfer the charge to
> > + * @lrucare: page might be on LRU already
>
> which one? I guess the newpage?
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 10:14:47AM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
...
> > > free_hot_cold_page(page, false);
> > > }
> > >
> > > @@ -75,7 +75,10 @@ static void __put_compound_page(struct page *page)
> > > {
> > > compound_page_dtor *dtor;
> > >
> > > - __page_cache_release(page);
> > > + i
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 09:30:50AM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 05:48:43PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:49:53PM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > > I feel that these 2 messages have the same cause (just appear
> > > differently).
> > > __a
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 05:48:43PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:49:53PM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > I feel that these 2 messages have the same cause (just appear differently).
> > __add_to_page_cache_locked() (and mem_cgroup_try_charge()) can be called
> > for hu
On Tue 15-07-14 17:48:43, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:49:53PM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > I feel that these 2 messages have the same cause (just appear differently).
> > __add_to_page_cache_locked() (and mem_cgroup_try_charge()) can be called
> > for hugetlb, while we
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:49:53PM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> I feel that these 2 messages have the same cause (just appear differently).
> __add_to_page_cache_locked() (and mem_cgroup_try_charge()) can be called
> for hugetlb, while we avoid calling mem_cgroup_migrate()/mem_cgroup_uncharge()
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 03:04:54PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 02:43:58PM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 01:34:39PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:07:35PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Tue 15-07-14 11:55:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 02:43:58PM -0400, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 01:34:39PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:07:35PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Tue 15-07-14 11:55:37, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 04:40:45PM -04
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 01:34:39PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:07:35PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 15-07-14 11:55:37, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 04:40:45PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/
On Tue 15-07-14 13:34:39, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:07:35PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 15-07-14 11:55:37, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 04:40:45PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > ...
> > > > diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
> > > > i
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 06:07:35PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 15-07-14 11:55:37, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 04:40:45PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > ...
> > > diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
> > > index a98f48626359..3074210f245d 100644
> > > --- a/mm/swap.c
On Tue 15-07-14 11:55:37, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 04:40:45PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> ...
> > diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
> > index a98f48626359..3074210f245d 100644
> > --- a/mm/swap.c
> > +++ b/mm/swap.c
> > @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ static void __page_cache_release
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 04:40:45PM -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
...
> diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c
> index a98f48626359..3074210f245d 100644
> --- a/mm/swap.c
> +++ b/mm/swap.c
> @@ -62,6 +62,7 @@ static void __page_cache_release(struct page *page)
> del_page_from_lru_list(page
On Tue 15-07-14 11:46:43, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 05:18:18PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 15-07-14 11:09:37, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:23:50PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > > On Tue 15-07-14 10:25:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > [...]
>
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 05:18:18PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 15-07-14 11:09:37, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:23:50PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > On Tue 15-07-14 10:25:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > > @@ -2760,15 +2752,15 @@ static void commit_charge(st
On Tue 15-07-14 11:09:37, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:23:50PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Tue 15-07-14 10:25:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > > @@ -2760,15 +2752,15 @@ static void commit_charge(struct page *page,
> > > struct mem_cgroup *memcg,
> > > spin_u
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 04:23:50PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 15-07-14 10:25:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > diff --git a/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt
> > b/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt
> > index bcf750d3cecd..8870b0212150 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_t
On Tue 15-07-14 10:25:45, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt
> b/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt
> index bcf750d3cecd..8870b0212150 100644
> --- a/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/cgroups/memcg_test.txt
[...]
> 6. Shmem(tmp
[...]
> +/**
> + * mem_cgroup_migrate - migrate a charge to another page
> + * @oldpage: currently charged page
> + * @newpage: page to transfer the charge to
> + * @lrucare: page might be on LRU already
which one? I guess the newpage?
> + *
> + * Migrate the charge from @oldpage to @newpage.
> +
On 06/20/2014 08:56 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:34:43 -0400 Sasha Levin wrote:
>
>> I'm seeing the following when booting a VM, bisection pointed me to this
>> patch.
>>
>> [ 32.830823] BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [] code:
>> mkdir/8677
>
> Thanks.
On Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:34:43 -0400 Sasha Levin wrote:
> I'm seeing the following when booting a VM, bisection pointed me to this
> patch.
>
> [ 32.830823] BUG: using __this_cpu_add() in preemptible [] code:
> mkdir/8677
Thanks. This one was fixed earlier today.
From: Michal Hocko
On 06/18/2014 04:40 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> The memcg uncharging code that is involved towards the end of a page's
> lifetime - truncation, reclaim, swapout, migration - is impressively
> complicated and fragile.
>
> Because anonymous and file pages were always charged before they had
> their
38 matches
Mail list logo
