Re: [LSF/MM TOPIC] Page flags, can we free up space ?

[Mike Kravetz]

On 1/22/19 12:17 PM, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> So lattely i have been looking at page flags and we are using 6 flags
> for memory reclaim and compaction:
> 
>     PG_referenced
>     PG_lru
>     PG_active
>     PG_workingset
>     PG_reclaim
>     PG_unevictable
> 
> On top of which you can add the page anonymous flag (anonymous or
> share memory)
>     PG_anon // does not exist, lower bit of page->mapping
> 
> And also the movable flag (which alias with KSM)
>     PG_movable // does not exist, lower bit of page->mapping
> 
> 
> So i would like to explore if there is a way to express the same amount
> of information with less bits. My methodology is to exhaustively list
> all the possible states (valid combination of above flags) and then to
> see how we change from one state to another (what event trigger the change
> like mlock(), page being referenced, ...) and under which rules (ie do we
> hold the page lock, zone lock, ...).
> 
> My hope is that there might be someway to use less bits to express the
> same thing. I am doing this because for my work on generic page write
> protection (ie KSM for file back page) which i talk about last year and
> want to talk about again ;) I will need to unalias the movable bit from
> KSM bit.
> 
> 
> Right now this is more a temptative ie i do not know if i will succeed,
> in any case i can report on failure or success and discuss my finding to
> get people opinions on the matter.
> 
> 
> I think everyone interested in mm will be interested in this topic :)

Explicitly adding Matthew on Cc as I am pretty sure he has been working
in this area.

-- 
Mike Kravetz