[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <26fded53-b79d-4538-bc56-3d2055eb5d62@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2025 16:21:57 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: "Pankaj Raghav (Samsung)" <kernel@...kajraghav.com>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Lorenzo Stoakes
<lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Nico Pache <npache@...hat.com>,
Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>, "Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, willy@...radead.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
"Darrick J . Wong" <djwong@...nel.org>, mcgrof@...nel.org,
gost.dev@...sung.com, hch@....de, Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] mm: add static PMD zero page
On 07.07.25 16:23, Pankaj Raghav (Samsung) wrote:
> From: Pankaj Raghav <p.raghav@...sung.com>
>
> There are many places in the kernel where we need to zeroout larger
> chunks but the maximum segment we can zeroout at a time by ZERO_PAGE
> is limited by PAGE_SIZE.
>
> This is especially annoying in block devices and filesystems where we
> attach multiple ZERO_PAGEs to the bio in different bvecs. With multipage
> bvec support in block layer, it is much more efficient to send out
> larger zero pages as a part of single bvec.
>
> This concern was raised during the review of adding LBS support to
> XFS[1][2].
>
> Usually huge_zero_folio is allocated on demand, and it will be
> deallocated by the shrinker if there are no users of it left. At moment,
> huge_zero_folio infrastructure refcount is tied to the process lifetime
> that created it. This might not work for bio layer as the completitions
> can be async and the process that created the huge_zero_folio might no
> longer be alive.
Of course, what we could do is indicating that there is any untracked
reference to the huge zero folio, and then simply refuse to free it for
all eternity.
Essentially, every any non-mm reference -> un-shrinkable.
We'd still be allocating the huge zero folio dynamically. We could try
allocating it on first usage either from memblock, or from the buddy if
already around.
Then, we'd only need a config option to allow for that to happen.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists