[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a37351a3-fb02-0709-1f4b-81525be34f05@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 18:20:27 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Nadav Amit <namit@...are.com>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
Roman Gushchin <guro@...com>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Donald Dutile <ddutile@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Liang Zhang <zhangliang5@...wei.com>,
Pedro Gomes <pedrodemargomes@...il.com>,
Oded Gabbay <oded.gabbay@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 08/16] mm/rmap: drop "compound" parameter from
page_add_new_anon_rmap()
On 13.04.22 14:48, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 02:28:38PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 13.04.22 14:26, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 11:37:09AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>> On 12.04.22 10:47, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>>>> There's a VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageTransCompound(page), page); later in a
>>>>> !compound branch. Since compound is now determined by the same check, could
>>>>> be deleted.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, eventually we could get rid of both VM_BUG_ON_PAGE() on both
>>>> branches and add a single VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageTail(page), page) check on
>>>> the compound branch. (we could also make sure that we're not given a
>>>> hugetlb page)
>>>
>>> As a rule of thumb, if you find yourself wanting to add
>>> VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageTail(page), page), you probably want to change the
>>> interface to take a folio.
>>
>> Yeah, I had the same in mind. Might be a reasonable addon on top --
>> although it would stick out in the rmap code a bit because most
>> functions deal with both, folios and subpages.
>
> I have the start of a series which starts looking at the fault path
> to see where it makes sense to use folios and where it makes sense to
> use pages.
>
> We're (generally) faulting on a PTE, so we need the precise page to
> be returned in vmf->page. However vmf->cow_page can/should be a
> folio (because it's definitely not a tail page). That trickles
> down into copy_present_page() (new_page and prealloc both become folios)
> and so page_add_new_anon_rmap() then looks like a good target to
> take a folio.
>
> The finish_fault() -> do_set_pte() -> page_add_new_anon_rmap() looks
> like the only kind of strange place where we don't necessarily have a
> folio (all the others we just allocated it).
>
That's an interesting point. In this patch I'm assuming that we don't
have a compound page here (see below).
Which makes sense, because as the interface states "Same as
page_add_anon_rmap but must only be called on *new* pages.".
At least to me it would be weird to allocate a new compound page to then
pass a subpage to do_set_pte() page_add_new_anon_rmap().
And in fact, inside page_add_new_anon_rmap(compound=false) we have
/* Anon THP always mapped first with PMD */
VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(PageTransCompound(page), page);
which makes sure that we cannot have a compound page here, but in fact a
folio.
So unless I am missing something, do_set_pte() should in fact have a
folio here unless BUG?
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists