[PATCH] mm: list_lru: only add memcg-aware lrus to the global lru list

From: Muchun Song
Date: Mon Oct 25 2021 - 08:44:14 EST


The non-memcg-aware lru is always skiped when traversing the global lru
list, which is not efficient. We can only add the memcg-aware lru to the
global lru list instead to make traversing more efficient.

Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/list_lru.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++-------------------
1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/list_lru.c b/mm/list_lru.c
index 7572f8e70b86..0cd5e89ca063 100644
--- a/mm/list_lru.c
+++ b/mm/list_lru.c
@@ -15,18 +15,29 @@
#include "slab.h"

#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG_KMEM
-static LIST_HEAD(list_lrus);
+static LIST_HEAD(memcg_list_lrus);
static DEFINE_MUTEX(list_lrus_mutex);

+static inline bool list_lru_memcg_aware(struct list_lru *lru)
+{
+ return lru->memcg_aware;
+}
+
static void list_lru_register(struct list_lru *lru)
{
+ if (!list_lru_memcg_aware(lru))
+ return;
+
mutex_lock(&list_lrus_mutex);
- list_add(&lru->list, &list_lrus);
+ list_add(&lru->list, &memcg_list_lrus);
mutex_unlock(&list_lrus_mutex);
}

static void list_lru_unregister(struct list_lru *lru)
{
+ if (!list_lru_memcg_aware(lru))
+ return;
+
mutex_lock(&list_lrus_mutex);
list_del(&lru->list);
mutex_unlock(&list_lrus_mutex);
@@ -37,11 +48,6 @@ static int lru_shrinker_id(struct list_lru *lru)
return lru->shrinker_id;
}

-static inline bool list_lru_memcg_aware(struct list_lru *lru)
-{
- return lru->memcg_aware;
-}
-
static inline struct list_lru_one *
list_lru_from_memcg_idx(struct list_lru_node *nlru, int idx)
{
@@ -457,9 +463,6 @@ static int memcg_update_list_lru(struct list_lru *lru,
{
int i;

- if (!list_lru_memcg_aware(lru))
- return 0;
-
for_each_node(i) {
if (memcg_update_list_lru_node(&lru->node[i],
old_size, new_size))
@@ -482,9 +485,6 @@ static void memcg_cancel_update_list_lru(struct list_lru *lru,
{
int i;

- if (!list_lru_memcg_aware(lru))
- return;
-
for_each_node(i)
memcg_cancel_update_list_lru_node(&lru->node[i],
old_size, new_size);
@@ -497,7 +497,7 @@ int memcg_update_all_list_lrus(int new_size)
int old_size = memcg_nr_cache_ids;

mutex_lock(&list_lrus_mutex);
- list_for_each_entry(lru, &list_lrus, list) {
+ list_for_each_entry(lru, &memcg_list_lrus, list) {
ret = memcg_update_list_lru(lru, old_size, new_size);
if (ret)
goto fail;
@@ -506,7 +506,7 @@ int memcg_update_all_list_lrus(int new_size)
mutex_unlock(&list_lrus_mutex);
return ret;
fail:
- list_for_each_entry_continue_reverse(lru, &list_lrus, list)
+ list_for_each_entry_continue_reverse(lru, &memcg_list_lrus, list)
memcg_cancel_update_list_lru(lru, old_size, new_size);
goto out;
}
@@ -543,9 +543,6 @@ static void memcg_drain_list_lru(struct list_lru *lru,
{
int i;

- if (!list_lru_memcg_aware(lru))
- return;
-
for_each_node(i)
memcg_drain_list_lru_node(lru, i, src_idx, dst_memcg);
}
@@ -555,7 +552,7 @@ void memcg_drain_all_list_lrus(int src_idx, struct mem_cgroup *dst_memcg)
struct list_lru *lru;

mutex_lock(&list_lrus_mutex);
- list_for_each_entry(lru, &list_lrus, list)
+ list_for_each_entry(lru, &memcg_list_lrus, list)
memcg_drain_list_lru(lru, src_idx, dst_memcg);
mutex_unlock(&list_lrus_mutex);
}
--
2.11.0