[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b525fbe7-8024-45be-a12e-771e0b8cdbc5@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 14:47:37 +0530
From: "Garg, Shivank" <shivankg@....com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...hat.com, ziy@...dia.com,
willy@...radead.org, matthew.brost@...el.com, joshua.hahnjy@...il.com,
rakie.kim@...com, byungchul@...com, gourry@...rry.net,
ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com, apopple@...dia.com,
lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com, Liam.Howlett@...cle.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
rppt@...nel.org, surenb@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, vkoul@...nel.org,
lucas.demarchi@...el.com, rdunlap@...radead.org, jgg@...pe.ca,
kuba@...nel.org, justonli@...omium.org, ivecera@...hat.com,
dave.jiang@...el.com, dan.j.williams@...el.com, rientjes@...gle.com,
Raghavendra.KodsaraThimmappa@....com, bharata@....com,
alirad.malek@...corp.com, yiannis@...corp.com, weixugc@...gle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC V3 4/9] mm/migrate: add migrate_folios_batch_move to batch
the folio move operations
On 10/2/2025 4:33 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
>> + /* TODO: Is there a better way of handling the poison
>> + * recover for batch copy, instead of falling back to serial copy?
> Is there a reason we might expect this to be common enough to care about
> not using the serial path?
Not common enough, I guess!
>
>> + */
>> + /* fallback to serial page copy if needed */
>> + if (rc) {
>> + dst = list_first_entry(dst_folios, struct folio, lru);
>> + dst2 = list_next_entry(dst, lru);
>> + list_for_each_entry_safe(folio, folio2, src_folios, lru) {
>> + is_thp = folio_test_large(folio) &&
>> + folio_test_pmd_mappable(folio);
>> + nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio);
>> + rc = folio_mc_copy(dst, folio);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists