[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c63ac79b-aebb-4308-aa36-cde62d190a62@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 15:51:19 +0800
From: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, chrisl@...nel.org, david@...hat.com,
ioworker0@...il.com, kasong@...cent.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, ryan.roberts@....com, v-songbaohua@...o.com,
x86@...nel.org, ying.huang@...el.com, zhengtangquan@...o.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] mm: Avoid splitting pmd for lazyfree pmd-mapped
THP in try_to_unmap
On 2025/1/14 14:00, Barry Song wrote:
>>>> if (!pvmw.pte) {
>>>> + lazyfree = folio_test_anon(folio) && !folio_test_swapbacked(folio);
>>>
>>> You've checked lazyfree here, so can we remove the duplicate check in
>>> unmap_huge_pmd_locked()? Then the code should be:
>>>
>>> if (lazyfree && unmap_huge_pmd_locked(...))
>>> goto walk_done;
>>
>>
>> right. it seems unmap_huge_pmd_locked() only handles lazyfree pmd-mapped
>> thp. so i guess the code could be:
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
>> index aea49f7125f1..c4c3a7896de4 100644
>> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
>> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
>> @@ -3131,11 +3131,10 @@ bool unmap_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
>> VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_pmd_mappable(folio), folio);
>> VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_locked(folio), folio);
>> VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(!IS_ALIGNED(addr, HPAGE_PMD_SIZE));
>> + VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_anon(folio), folio);
>> + VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_swapbacked(folio), folio);
>>
>> - if (folio_test_anon(folio) && !folio_test_swapbacked(folio))
>> - return __discard_anon_folio_pmd_locked(vma, addr, pmdp, folio);
>> -
>> - return false;
>> + return __discard_anon_folio_pmd_locked(vma, addr, pmdp, folio);
>> }
>>
>> static void remap_page(struct folio *folio, unsigned long nr, int flags)
>> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
>> index 02c4e4b2cd7b..72907eb1b8fe 100644
>> --- a/mm/rmap.c
>> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
>> @@ -1671,7 +1671,7 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>> DEFINE_FOLIO_VMA_WALK(pvmw, folio, vma, address, 0);
>> pte_t pteval;
>> struct page *subpage;
>> - bool anon_exclusive, lazyfree, ret = true;
>> + bool anon_exclusive, ret = true;
>> struct mmu_notifier_range range;
>> enum ttu_flags flags = (enum ttu_flags)(long)arg;
>> int nr_pages = 1;
>> @@ -1724,18 +1724,16 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_one(struct folio *folio, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>> }
>>
>> if (!pvmw.pte) {
>> - lazyfree = folio_test_anon(folio) && !folio_test_swapbacked(folio);
>> -
>> - if (unmap_huge_pmd_locked(vma, pvmw.address, pvmw.pmd,
>> - folio))
>> - goto walk_done;
>> - /*
>> - * unmap_huge_pmd_locked has either already marked
>> - * the folio as swap-backed or decided to retain it
>> - * due to GUP or speculative references.
>> - */
>> - if (lazyfree)
>> + if (folio_test_anon(folio) && !folio_test_swapbacked(folio)) {
>> + if (unmap_huge_pmd_locked(vma, pvmw.address, pvmw.pmd, folio))
>> + goto walk_done;
>> + /*
>> + * unmap_huge_pmd_locked has either already marked
>> + * the folio as swap-backed or decided to retain it
>> + * due to GUP or speculative references.
>> + */
>> goto walk_abort;
>> + }
>>
>> if (flags & TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD) {
>> /*
>>
>>>
>>>> if (unmap_huge_pmd_locked(vma, pvmw.address, pvmw.pmd,
>>>> folio))
>>>> goto walk_done;
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * unmap_huge_pmd_locked has either already marked
>>>> + * the folio as swap-backed or decided to retain it
>>>> + * due to GUP or speculative references.
>>>> + */
>>>> + if (lazyfree)
>>>> + goto walk_abort;
>>>>
>>>> if (flags & TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD) {
>>>> /*
>
>
>
> The final diff is as follows.
> Baolin, do you have any additional comments before I send out v3?
No other comments. Look good to me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists