Re: [PATCH 2/2] move slab pages to the lru, for 2.5.27

[Ed Tomlinson]

On July 21, 2002 05:24 pm, Craig Kulesa wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jul 2002, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> > Well not quite random.  It prunes the oldest entries.
>
> Yes, you're right, I was speaking sloppily.
>
> I meant "random" in the sense that "those pruned entries don't correspond
> to the page I'm scanning right now in refill_inactive_zone".  Establishing
> that connection seems simultaneously very interesting and confusing. :)
>
> > What I tried to do here was keep the rate of aging in sync with the VM.
>
> I think it works darn well too!  But maybe a page-centric freeing system
> would do that too.  In your patch, you distinguish between:
>
> 	- aging prunable slab pages by "counting" the slab pages
> 	  to determine the rate of pruning, and using the caches' internal
> 	  lru order to determine the actual entries that get pruned
> and
> 	- aging non-prunable slabs with page->age.
>
> Can we unify them and just use page->age (or, in the case of stock 2.5.27,
> do it in the VM's LRU order)?  That is, if you encounter a cold slab page
> in scanning the active list, try to prune just *that* page's slab
> resources.  If it manages to free the slab, free the page.  Otherwise,
> try again next time we visit the page.
>
> > Thats a question I have asked myself too.  What could be done is, scan
> > the entries in the slab encountered,
>
> I think *that's* the part I'm having difficulty envisioning.  If
> cachep->pruner, then I might find myself in dcache.c (for example)
> living in a pruner callback that no longer remembers "my" slab page.
> Seems like we need a "dentry_lookup" method that returns a list of
> [di]cache objects living in a specified slab (page).  Then feed that
> list to a modified prune_[di]cache and see if that frees the slab.
>
> Not the current "prune 'N' old entries from the cache, and I don't care

Make that, if the slab is empty free it, if the cache as a pruner callback, 
count the entries in it for aging later.

> where they live in memory".  We're coming in instead and saying "I _know_
> this page is old, so try to free its entries".  This is, I suppose, saying
> that we want to throw out (or at least ignore) the caches' internal LRU
> aging methods and use the VM's LRU order (2.5.27), or page->age (2.5.27

Exactly.

> plus full rmap).  Uh oh.  This is getting scary.  And maybe wrong.  :)
>
> So, that list-returning method has me befuddled.  And maybe we don't
> really want to do any of this.  Which is why I asked. :)

It actually works fairly well as currently implemented.  Suspect it would work better
if we aged entries in the slabs we encounted.  That being said, think it would take
a fairly major change to the dcache/icache logic to allow this to happen.

Think we would need to know,  is the slab entry active, and second what list(s) is it
on.  With this info we loop thru all entries in a slab, if the entry is active we call
the pruner callback to prune it if possible.  If we pruned all entries free the slab.

1. How do we know if a slab entry is active?
2. How do we determine what list(s) the dentry, inode is on?

Ed Tomlinson