From patchwork Fri Mar 13 18:34:36 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Yang Shi X-Patchwork-Id: 11437575 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org (pdx-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [172.30.200.123]) by pdx-korg-patchwork-2.web.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59608913 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 18:35:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3201C2074C for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 18:35:00 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 3201C2074C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 3B02A6B0007; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:34:59 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: linux-mm-outgoing@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 388486B0008; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:34:59 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 2758B6B000A; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:34:59 -0400 (EDT) X-Original-To: linux-mm@kvack.org X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0079.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.79]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D1D86B0007 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 14:34:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin24.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA9C22493 for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 18:34:58 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76591190676.24.grade33_4875b043a004a X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,f0a63f336d00e763,d41d8cd98f00b204,yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com,,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:560:800:960:973:988:989:1260:1261:1345:1359:1437:1534:1541:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:2198:2199:2393:2559:2562:2693:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3353:3865:3866:3867:3868:3870:3871:3872:3874:4250:4321:4423:5007:6261:7903:8700:8784:8957:10004:11026:11658:11914:12114:12296:12297:12438:12555:12679:12895:13069:13161:13229:13311:13357:14093:14096:14181:14384:14394:14721:21060:21080:21324:21451:21627:30054:30070,0,RBL:115.124.30.57:@linux.alibaba.com:.lbl8.mailshell.net-64.201.201.201 62.20.2.100,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:fp,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:23,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: grade33_4875b043a004a X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 3189 Received: from out30-57.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-57.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.57]) by imf36.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 13 Mar 2020 18:34:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Alimail-AntiSpam: AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R151e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=e01f04397;MF=yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=6;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0TsUkHy3_1584124485; Received: from localhost(mailfrom:yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0TsUkHy3_1584124485) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com(127.0.0.1); Sat, 14 Mar 2020 02:34:53 +0800 From: Yang Shi To: shakeelb@google.com, vbabka@suse.cz, akpm@linux-foundation.org Cc: yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 2/2] mm: swap: use smp_mb__after_atomic() to order LRU bit set Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 02:34:36 +0800 Message-Id: <1584124476-76534-2-git-send-email-yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.8.3.1 In-Reply-To: <1584124476-76534-1-git-send-email-yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com> References: <1584124476-76534-1-git-send-email-yang.shi@linux.alibaba.com> X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: Memory barrier is needed after setting LRU bit, but smp_mb() is too strong. Some architectures, i.e. x86, imply memory barrier with atomic operations, so replacing it with smp_mb__after_atomic() sounds better, which is nop on strong ordered machines, and full memory barriers on others. With this change the vm-calability cases would perform better on x86, I saw total 6% improvement with this patch and previous inline fix. The test data (lru-file-readtwice throughput) against v5.6-rc4: mainline w/ inline fix w/ both (adding this) 150MB 154MB 159MB Fixes: 9c4e6b1a7027 ("mm, mlock, vmscan: no more skipping pagevecs") Cc: Shakeel Butt Cc: Vlastimil Babka Signed-off-by: Yang Shi Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka --- mm/swap.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/mm/swap.c b/mm/swap.c index cf39d24..118bac4 100644 --- a/mm/swap.c +++ b/mm/swap.c @@ -945,20 +945,20 @@ static void __pagevec_lru_add_fn(struct page *page, struct lruvec *lruvec, * #0: __pagevec_lru_add_fn #1: clear_page_mlock * * SetPageLRU() TestClearPageMlocked() - * smp_mb() // explicit ordering // above provides strict + * MB() // explicit ordering // above provides strict * // ordering * PageMlocked() PageLRU() * * * if '#1' does not observe setting of PG_lru by '#0' and fails * isolation, the explicit barrier will make sure that page_evictable - * check will put the page in correct LRU. Without smp_mb(), SetPageLRU + * check will put the page in correct LRU. Without MB(), SetPageLRU * can be reordered after PageMlocked check and can make '#1' to fail * the isolation of the page whose Mlocked bit is cleared (#0 is also * looking at the same page) and the evictable page will be stranded * in an unevictable LRU. */ - smp_mb(); + smp_mb__after_atomic(); if (page_evictable(page)) { lru = page_lru(page);