linux-kernel - [RFC PATCH] mm: huge_memory: add folio_mark

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <34bab7a60930472377afbfeefe05b980d0512aa4.1744118089.git.baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Tue,  8 Apr 2025 21:16:35 +0800
From: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: willy@...radead.org,
	david@...hat.com,
	21cnbao@...il.com,
	ryan.roberts@....com,
	ziy@...dia.com,
	baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com,
	linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH] mm: huge_memory: add folio_mark_accessed() when zapping file THP

When investigating performance issues during file folio unmap, I noticed some
behavioral differences in handling non-PMD-sized folios and PMD-sized folios.
For non-PMD-sized file folios, it will call folio_mark_accessed() to mark the
folio as having seen activity, but this is not done for PMD-sized folios.

This might not cause obvious issues, but a potential problem could be that,
it might lead to more frequent refaults of PMD-sized file folios under memory
pressure. Therefore, I am unsure whether the folio_mark_accessed() should be
added for PMD-sized file folios?

Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
---
 mm/huge_memory.c | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index 6ac6d468af0d..b3ade7ac5bbf 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -2262,6 +2262,10 @@ int zap_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 				zap_deposited_table(tlb->mm, pmd);
 			add_mm_counter(tlb->mm, mm_counter_file(folio),
 				       -HPAGE_PMD_NR);
+
+			if (flush_needed && pmd_young(orig_pmd) &&
+			    likely(vma_has_recency(vma)))
+				folio_mark_accessed(folio);
 		}

 		spin_unlock(ptl);
-- 
2.43.5