Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1335751

Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to active/inactive sizing

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 08:35:53PM +0100, Andres Freund wrote:
> To make an actually usable patch out of this it seems we'd have to add a
> 'partial' argument to grab_cache_page_write_begin(), so writes to parts
> of a page still cause the pages to be marked active.  Is it preferrable
> to change all callers of grab_cache_page_write_begin and
> add_to_page_cache_lru or make them into wrapper functions, and call the
> real deal when it matters?

Personally, I'd prefer explicit arguments over another layer of
wrappers, especially in the add_to_page_cache family. But it's
possible others will disagree and only voice their opinion once you
went through the hassle and sent a patch.

> I do think that that's a reasonable algorithmic change, but nonetheless
> its obviously possible that such changes regress some workloads. What's
> the policy around testing such things?

How about a FGP_WRITE that only sets the page's referenced bit, but
doesn't activate or refault-activate the page?

That way, pages that are only ever written would never get activated,
but a single read mixed in would activate the page straightaway;
either in mark_page_accessed() or through refault-activation.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to active/inactive  sizing Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> - 2016-02-09 18:00 +0100
  Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to active/inactive  sizing Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-02-09 23:50 +0100
    Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to  active/inactive sizing Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> - 2016-02-11 21:40 +0100
      Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to active/inactive  sizing Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> - 2016-02-12 13:50 +0100
        Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to active/inactive  sizing Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> - 2016-02-12 20:40 +0100
          Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to active/inactive  sizing Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-02-16 20:40 +0100
          Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to  active/inactive sizing Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com> - 2016-02-17 22:20 +0100
            Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to active/inactive  sizing Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> - 2016-02-19 23:30 +0100
      Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to active/inactive  sizing Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> - 2016-02-12 14:00 +0100
      Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to active/inactive  sizing Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org> - 2016-02-12 21:30 +0100
        Re: Unhelpful caching decisions, possibly related to active/inactive  sizing Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> - 2016-02-19 23:10 +0100

csiph-web