@@ -4439,7 +4439,7 @@ static void inc_max_seq(struct lruvec *lruvec, bool can_swap, bool force_scan)
int prev, next;
int type, zone;
struct lru_gen_folio *lrugen = &lruvec->lrugen;
-
+restart:
spin_lock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock);
VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!seq_is_valid(lruvec));
@@ -4450,11 +4450,12 @@ static void inc_max_seq(struct lruvec *lruvec, bool can_swap, bool force_scan)
VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!force_scan && (type == LRU_GEN_FILE || can_swap));
- while (!inc_min_seq(lruvec, type, can_swap)) {
- spin_unlock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock);
- cond_resched();
- spin_lock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock);
- }
+ if (inc_min_seq(lruvec, type, can_swap))
+ continue;
+
+ spin_unlock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock);
+ cond_resched();
+ goto restart;
}
/*
inc_max_seq() will try to inc_min_seq() if nr_gens == MAX_NR_GENS. This is because the generations are reused (the last oldest now empty generation will become the next youngest generation). inc_min_seq() is retried until successful, dropping the lru_lock and yielding the CPU on each failure, and retaking the lock before trying again: while (!inc_min_seq(lruvec, type, can_swap)) { spin_unlock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock); cond_resched(); spin_lock_irq(&lruvec->lru_lock); } However, the initial condition that required incrementing the min_seq (nr_gens == MAX_NR_GENS) is not retested. This can change by another call to inc_max_seq() from run_aging() with force_scan=true from the debugfs interface. Since the eviction stalls when the nr_gens == MIN_NR_GENS, avoid unnecessarily incrementing the min_seq by rechecking the number of generations before each attempt. This issue was uncovered in previous discussion on the list by Yu Zhao and Aneesh Kumar [1]. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/CAOUHufbO7CaVm=xjEb1avDhHVvnC8pJmGyKcFf2iY_dpf+zR3w@mail.gmail.com/ Cc: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com> Cc: Aneesh Kumar K V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@google.com> --- mm/vmscan.c | 13 +++++++------ 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)