[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250822143043.GG1311579@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2025 11:30:43 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@...gle.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
Dennis Zhou <dennis@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.org>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
linux-ide@...r.kernel.org, intel-gfx@...ts.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...s.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-mm@...ck.org, io-uring@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux.dev,
kasan-dev@...glegroups.com, wireguard@...ts.zx2c4.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
Alexandre Ghiti <alex@...ti.fr>, Alex Dubov <oakad@...oo.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Andreas Larsson <andreas@...sler.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Brett Creeley <brett.creeley@....com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
Damien Le Moal <dlemoal@...nel.org>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Doug Gilbert <dgilbert@...erlog.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com>,
"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>,
Jesper Nilsson <jesper.nilsson@...s.com>,
Joonas Lahtinen <joonas.lahtinen@...ux.intel.com>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Lars Persson <lars.persson@...s.com>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@...il.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
Niklas Cassel <cassel@...nel.org>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>,
Shameer Kolothum <shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>,
Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tvrtko Ursulin <tursulin@...ulin.net>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>, WANG Xuerui <kernel@...0n.name>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/35] mm: remove nth_page()
On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 10:06:26PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> As discussed recently with Linus, nth_page() is just nasty and we would
> like to remove it.
>
> To recap, the reason we currently need nth_page() within a folio is because
> on some kernel configs (SPARSEMEM without SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP), the
> memmap is allocated per memory section.
>
> While buddy allocations cannot cross memory section boundaries, hugetlb
> and dax folios can.
>
> So crossing a memory section means that "page++" could do the wrong thing.
> Instead, nth_page() on these problematic configs always goes from
> page->pfn, to the go from (++pfn)->page, which is rather nasty.
>
> Likely, many people have no idea when nth_page() is required and when
> it might be dropped.
>
> We refer to such problematic PFN ranges and "non-contiguous pages".
> If we only deal with "contiguous pages", there is not need for nth_page().
>
> Besides that "obvious" folio case, we might end up using nth_page()
> within CMA allocations (again, could span memory sections), and in
> one corner case (kfence) when processing memblock allocations (again,
> could span memory sections).
I browsed the patches and it looks great to me, thanks for doing this
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists