[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <188bd60a-e58a-a0f7-727f-bb2ce2a40d94@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2023 19:15:02 +0800
From: "zhangpeng (AS)" <zhangpeng362@...wei.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>
CC: <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
<muchun.song@...ux.dev>, <sidhartha.kumar@...cle.com>,
<vishal.moola@...il.com>, <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>,
<sunnanyong@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/hugetlb: Use a folio in hugetlb_wp()
On 2023/6/3 4:17, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 09:54:08AM +0800, Peng Zhang wrote:
>> From: ZhangPeng <zhangpeng362@...wei.com>
>>
>> We can replace nine implict calls to compound_head() with one by using
>> old_folio. However, we still need to keep old_page because we need to
>> know which page in the folio we are copying.
> Do we? It's my understanding (and I am far from an expert here ...)
> that the 'pte_t *' we are passed *inside hugetlbfs* is not in fact a pte
> pointer at all but actually a pmd or pud pointer. See how we do this:
>
> pte_t pte = huge_ptep_get(ptep);
>
> and so the page we get back is always a head page, and we can go
> directly to a folio. ie this is different from the THP cases.
Yes, I'll remove ptepage and old_page in a v2. Thanks.
Best Regards,
Peng
Powered by blists - more mailing lists