Re: [PATCH v2 -mm] make swapin readahead skip over holes

[Johannes Weiner]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 04:30:12PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On 01/11/2012 04:10 PM, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> >On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 02:30:44PM -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> >>Ever since abandoning the virtual scan of processes, for scalability
> >>reasons, swap space has been a little more fragmented than before.
> >>This can lead to the situation where a large memory user is killed,
> >>swap space ends up full of "holes" and swapin readahead is totally
> >>ineffective.
> >>
> >>On my home system, after killing a leaky firefox it took over an
> >>hour to page just under 2GB of memory back in, slowing the virtual
> >>machines down to a crawl.
> >>
> >>This patch makes swapin readahead simply skip over holes, instead
> >>of stopping at them.  This allows the system to swap things back in
> >>at rates of several MB/second, instead of a few hundred kB/second.
> >>
> >>The checks done in valid_swaphandles are already done in
> >>read_swap_cache_async as well, allowing us to remove a fair amount
> >>of code.
> >
> >__swap_duplicate() also checks for whether the offset is within the
> >swap device range.  Do you think we could remove get_swap_cluster()
> >altogether and just try reading the aligned page_cluster range?
> 
> That is how I implemented it originally, but we need
> to take the swap_lock so it is cleaner to implement
> a helper function in swapfile.c :)

AFAICS, it's only needed to validate the offset against si->max, but
this too is done in __swap_duplicate().

What's otherwise left is just rounding down swp_offset(entry) and
adding 1 << page_cluster to it, that shouldn't need the swap_lock?

Am I missing something?
--
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/