[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3ffda308-1210-4760-bac0-ba5b019c0e2a@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 14:31:57 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>, hannes@...xchg.org,
hughd@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, roman.gushchin@...ux.dev,
shakeel.butt@...ux.dev, muchun.song@...ux.dev, lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com,
ziy@...dia.com, harry.yoo@...cle.com, baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com,
Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, npache@...hat.com, ryan.roberts@....com,
dev.jain@....com, baohua@...nel.org, lance.yang@...ux.dev,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cgroups@...r.kernel.org, Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] mm: thp: use folio_batch to handle THP splitting
in deferred_split_scan()
On 23.09.25 11:16, Qi Zheng wrote:
> From: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
>
> The maintenance of the folio->_deferred_list is intricate because it's
> reused in a local list.
>
> Here are some peculiarities:
>
> 1) When a folio is removed from its split queue and added to a local
> on-stack list in deferred_split_scan(), the ->split_queue_len isn't
> updated, leading to an inconsistency between it and the actual
> number of folios in the split queue.
>
> 2) When the folio is split via split_folio() later, it's removed from
> the local list while holding the split queue lock. At this time,
> this lock protects the local list, not the split queue.
>
> 3) To handle the race condition with a third-party freeing or migrating
> the preceding folio, we must ensure there's always one safe (with
> raised refcount) folio before by delaying its folio_put(). More
> details can be found in commit e66f3185fa04 ("mm/thp: fix deferred
> split queue not partially_mapped"). It's rather tricky.
>
> We can use the folio_batch infrastructure to handle this clearly. In this
> case, ->split_queue_len will be consistent with the real number of folios
> in the split queue. If list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list) returns false,
> it's clear the folio must be in its split queue (not in a local list
> anymore).
>
> In the future, we will reparent LRU folios during memcg offline to
> eliminate dying memory cgroups, which requires reparenting the split queue
> to its parent first. So this patch prepares for using
> folio_split_queue_lock_irqsave() as the memcg may change then.
>
> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
> Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@...edance.com>
> ---
Nothing jumped at me
Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
--
Cheers
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists