[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d85c0f04-1792-2a0f-d0be-7fffc7604797@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2023 15:00:07 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@...el.com>,
Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] mm: Non-pmd-mappable, large folios for
folio_add_new_anon_rmap()
On 14.07.23 18:17, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> In preparation for FLEXIBLE_THP support, improve
> folio_add_new_anon_rmap() to allow a non-pmd-mappable, large folio to be
> passed to it. In this case, all contained pages are accounted using the
> order-0 folio (or base page) scheme.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
> Reviewed-by: Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>
> Reviewed-by: Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@...el.com>
> ---
> mm/rmap.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
> index 0c0d8857dfce..f293d072368a 100644
> --- a/mm/rmap.c
> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
> @@ -1278,31 +1278,45 @@ void page_add_anon_rmap(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> * This means the inc-and-test can be bypassed.
> * The folio does not have to be locked.
> *
> - * If the folio is large, it is accounted as a THP. As the folio
> + * If the folio is pmd-mappable, it is accounted as a THP. As the folio
> * is new, it's assumed to be mapped exclusively by a single process.
> */
> void folio_add_new_anon_rmap(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> unsigned long address)
> {
> - int nr;
> + int nr = folio_nr_pages(folio);
>
> - VM_BUG_ON_VMA(address < vma->vm_start || address >= vma->vm_end, vma);
> + VM_BUG_ON_VMA(address < vma->vm_start ||
> + address + (nr << PAGE_SHIFT) > vma->vm_end, vma);
> __folio_set_swapbacked(folio);
>
> - if (likely(!folio_test_pmd_mappable(folio))) {
> + if (!folio_test_large(folio)) {
Why remove the "likely" here? The patch itself does not change anything
about that condition.
> /* increment count (starts at -1) */
> atomic_set(&folio->_mapcount, 0);
> - nr = 1;
> + __page_set_anon_rmap(folio, &folio->page, vma, address, 1);
> + } else if (!folio_test_pmd_mappable(folio)) {
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
> + struct page *page = folio_page(folio, i);
> +
> + /* increment count (starts at -1) */
> + atomic_set(&page->_mapcount, 0);
> + __page_set_anon_rmap(folio, page, vma,
> + address + (i << PAGE_SHIFT), 1);
> + }
> +
> + /* increment count (starts at 0) */
That comment is a bit misleading. We're not talking about a mapcount as
in the other cases here.
> + atomic_set(&folio->_nr_pages_mapped, nr);
> } else {
> /* increment count (starts at -1) */
> atomic_set(&folio->_entire_mapcount, 0);
> atomic_set(&folio->_nr_pages_mapped, COMPOUND_MAPPED);
> - nr = folio_nr_pages(folio);
> + __page_set_anon_rmap(folio, &folio->page, vma, address, 1);
> __lruvec_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_ANON_THPS, nr);
> }
>
Apart from that, LGTM.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists