Re: 回复: [PATCH] mm:vmscan: fix extra adjustment for lruvec's nonresident_age in case of reactivation

[Johannes Weiner]

On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 02:27:24PM +0000, 解 咏梅 wrote:
> But now, move_pages_to_lru didn't increase nonresident age for active rotation.
> Back toinactive age, VM ONLY care about the pages left inactive lru, AKA activation and reclaiming.
> Anyway reactivation is rare case, so whatever it contributes to nonresident age or not is ok to me.
> 
> But I am interested the logic how to guess the pages will be referenced again in the future.
> If active reactivation does matter to nonresident age. why not active rotation? But, currently it doesn't.

Can you point me to the code you're referring to? Looking at
move_pages_to_lru(), any pages with PageActive() set count toward the
non-resident age. That means activations from the inactive list, as
well as rotations on the active list, increase the nonresident age.

As to your question which one is right: the original workingset patch
was wrong not to count activations and reactivations. If we see a page
referenced in memory, it means it's hotter than the page that's not
refaulting -> nonresident age increses.

So the code as it is now looks correct to me.

Thanks