Re: [PATCH 1/3 v2] mm: Batch unmapping of file mapped pages inshrink_page_list
From: Tim Chen
Date: Thu Sep 13 2012 - 12:06:04 EST
On Tue, 2012-09-11 at 12:05 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> One *massive* change here that is not called out in the changelog is that
> the reclaim path now holds the page lock on multiple pages at the same
> time waiting for them to be batch unlocked in __remove_mapping_batch.
> This is suspicious for two reasons.
> The first suspicion is that it is expected that there are filesystems
> that lock multiple pages in page->index order and page reclaim tries to
> lock pages in a random order. You are "ok" because you trylock the pages
> but there should be a comment explaining the situation and why you're
> My *far* greater concern is that the hold time for a locked page is
> now potentially much longer. You could lock a bunch of filesystem pages
> and then call pageout() on an swapcache page that takes a long time to
> write. This potentially causes a filesystem (or flusher threads etc)
> to stall on lock_page and that could cause all sorts of latency trouble.
> It will be hard to hit this bug and diagnose it but I believe it's
> That second risk *really* must be commented upon and ideally reviewed by
> the filesystem people. However, I very strongly suspect that the outcome
> of such a review will be a suggestion to unlock the pages and reacquire
> the lock in __remove_mapping_batch(). Bear in mind that if you take this
> approach that you *must* use trylock when reacquiring the page lock and
> handle being unable to lock the page.
Thanks for your detailed comments and analysis. If I unlock the pages,
will flusher threads be the only things that will touch them? Or do I
have to worry about potentially other things done to the pages that will
make it invalid for me to unmap the pages later and put them on free
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/