[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20250217201242.798583040111ddc019f68438@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 20:12:42 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, "Kirill A . Shutemov"
<kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>, David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>, Ryan Roberts
<ryan.roberts@....com>, Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>, Yang Shi
<yang@...amperecomputing.com>, Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>, Kefeng
Wang <wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com>, Yu Zhao <yuzhao@...gle.com>, John
Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/8] mm/huge_memory: add buddy allocator like
(non-uniform) folio_split()
On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 10:22:44 -0500 Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks. The patch below should fix it.
> >
> > I am going to send V8, since
> > 1. there have been 4 fixes so far for V7, a new series would help people
> > review;
> >
> > 2. based on the discussion with you in THP cabal meeting, to
> > convert split_huge_page*() to use __folio_split(), the current
> > __folio_split() interface becomes awkward. Two changes are needed:
> > a) use in folio offset instead of struct page, since even in
> > truncate_inode_partial_folio() I needed to convert in folio offset
> > struct page to use my current interface;
> > b) split_huge_page*()'s caller might hold the page lock at a non-head
> > page, so an additional keep_lock_at_in_folio_offset is needed
> > to indicate which after-split folio should be kept locked after
> > split is done.
> >
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I am planing to send V8 to collect all fixup patches I have so far plus
> the one below and change folio_split() interface and some of the code.
> What is your preferred method?
>
> 1. you can pick up the fixup below and I send a new set of patches to
> change folio_split();
>
> 2. I collect a new V8 with all fixup patches and folio_split() change.
>
> For 1, the commit history might be messy due to my new folio_split()
> change. For 2, Minimize xa_node allocation during xarry split [1]
> patchset depends on patch 1 of this series, which adds some extra work
> for you to collect V8 (alternatively, I can send V8 without patch 1).
We're only at -rc3, so I'll remove both series from mm.git. Please
fully resend both series against mm-unstable?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists