[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <68910328-ba58-0554-c961-6a4087c72354@huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 20:15:54 +0800
From: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
To: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
CC: <kernel@...kajraghav.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	<mcgrof@...nel.org>, <nao.horiguchi@...il.com>, Lorenzo Stoakes
	<lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
	"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, Nico Pache <npache@...hat.com>,
	Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>, Barry Song
	<baohua@...nel.org>, Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>, "Matthew Wilcox
 (Oracle)" <willy@...radead.org>, Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>, "Yang
 Shi" <shy828301@...il.com>, <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mm@...ck.org>, <david@...hat.com>,
	<jane.chu@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] mm/memory-failure: improve large block size folio
 handling.
On 2025/10/30 9:40, Zi Yan wrote:
> Large block size (LBS) folios cannot be split to order-0 folios but
> min_order_for_folio(). Current split fails directly, but that is not
> optimal. Split the folio to min_order_for_folio(), so that, after split,
> only the folio containing the poisoned page becomes unusable instead.
> 
> For soft offline, do not split the large folio if its min_order_for_folio()
> is not 0. Since the folio is still accessible from userspace and premature
> split might lead to potential performance loss.
> 
> Suggested-by: Jane Chu <jane.chu@...cle.com>
> Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
> Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
> Reviewed-by: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Reviewed-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@...wei.com>
Thanks.
.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
