| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <ebdf1926-2e9b-4226-b80d-4f9975f72f7d@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 08:56:24 +1100
From: Balbir Singh <balbirs@...dia.com>
To: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>, "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@...il.com>,
Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@...com>, Byungchul Park <byungchul@...com>,
Gregory Price <gourry@...rry.net>, Ying Huang
<ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com>, Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
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>, Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>,
Mika Penttilä <mpenttil@...hat.com>,
Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com>,
Francois Dugast <francois.dugast@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/huge_memory.c: introduce split_unmapped_folio_to_order
On 11/14/25 08:45, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 13 Nov 2025, at 16:39, Balbir Singh wrote:
>
>> On 11/13/25 10:49, Balbir Singh wrote:
>>> On 11/12/25 22:34, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote:
>>>> On 12.11.25 11:17, Balbir Singh wrote:
>>>>> On 11/12/25 21:00, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote:
>>>>>> On 12.11.25 05:46, Balbir Singh wrote:
>>>>>>> Unmapped was added as a parameter to __folio_split() and related
>>>>>>> call sites to support splitting of folios already in the midst
>>>>>>> of a migration. This special case arose for device private folio
>>>>>>> migration since during migration there could be a disconnect between
>>>>>>> source and destination on the folio size.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Introduce split_unmapped_folio_to_order() to handle this special case.
>>>>>>> This in turn removes the special casing introduced by the unmapped
>>>>>>> parameter in __folio_split().
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As raised recently, I would hope that we can find a way to make all these splitting functions look more similar in the long term, ideally starting with "folio_split" / "folio_try_split".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What about
>>>>>>
>>>>>> folio_split_unmapped()
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do we really have to spell out the "to order" part in the function name?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And if it's more a mostly-internal helper, maybe
>>>>>>
>>>>>> __folio_split_unmapped()
>>>>>>
>>>>>> subject: "mm/huge_memory: introduce ..."
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I can rename it, but currently it confirms to the split_folio with order in the name
>>>>> The order is there in the name because in the future with mTHP we will want to
>>>>> support splitting to various orders.
>>>>
>>>> I think we should start naming them more consistently regarding folio_split() immediately and cleanup the other ones later.
>>>>
>>>> I don't understand why "_to_order" must be in the name right now. You can add another variant and start using longer names when really required.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ack
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
>>>>>>> Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@...il.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Rakie Kim <rakie.kim@...com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Byungchul Park <byungchul@...com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Gregory Price <gourry@...rry.net>
>>>>>>> Cc: Ying Huang <ying.huang@...ux.alibaba.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Alistair Popple <apopple@...dia.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
>>>>>>> Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Nico Pache <npache@...hat.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>
>>>>>>> Cc: Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
>>>>>>> Cc: David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>
>>>>>>> Cc: Ralph Campbell <rcampbell@...dia.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Mika Penttilä <mpenttil@...hat.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Matthew Brost <matthew.brost@...el.com>
>>>>>>> Cc: Francois Dugast <francois.dugast@...el.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Suggested-by: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Balbir Singh <balbirs@...dia.com>
>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>> include/linux/huge_mm.h | 5 +-
>>>>>>> mm/huge_memory.c | 135 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>>>>>> mm/migrate_device.c | 3 +-
>>>>>>> 3 files changed, 120 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/huge_mm.h b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>>>>>> index e2e91aa1a042..9155e683c08a 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
>>>>>>> @@ -371,7 +371,8 @@ enum split_type {
>>>>>>> bool can_split_folio(struct folio *folio, int caller_pins, int *pextra_pins);
>>>>>>> int __split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(struct page *page, struct list_head *list,
>>>>>>> - unsigned int new_order, bool unmapped);
>>>>>>> + unsigned int new_order);
>>>>>>> +int split_unmapped_folio_to_order(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order);
>>>>>>> int min_order_for_split(struct folio *folio);
>>>>>>> int split_folio_to_list(struct folio *folio, struct list_head *list);
>>>>>>> bool folio_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
>>>>>>> @@ -382,7 +383,7 @@ int folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order, struct page *page,
>>>>>>> static inline int split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(struct page *page, struct list_head *list,
>>>>>>> unsigned int new_order)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> - return __split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(page, list, new_order, false);
>>>>>>> + return __split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(page, list, new_order);
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> static inline int split_huge_page_to_order(struct page *page, unsigned int new_order)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>>>>>> index 0184cd915f44..942bd8410c54 100644
>>>>>>> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
>>>>>>> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>>>>>> @@ -3747,7 +3747,6 @@ bool folio_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
>>>>>>> * @lock_at: a page within @folio to be left locked to caller
>>>>>>> * @list: after-split folios will be put on it if non NULL
>>>>>>> * @split_type: perform uniform split or not (non-uniform split)
>>>>>>> - * @unmapped: The pages are already unmapped, they are migration entries.
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>> * It calls __split_unmapped_folio() to perform uniform and non-uniform split.
>>>>>>> * It is in charge of checking whether the split is supported or not and
>>>>>>> @@ -3763,7 +3762,7 @@ bool folio_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>> static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
>>>>>>> struct page *split_at, struct page *lock_at,
>>>>>>> - struct list_head *list, enum split_type split_type, bool unmapped)
>>>>>>> + struct list_head *list, enum split_type split_type)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah, nice to see that go.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> struct deferred_split *ds_queue;
>>>>>>> XA_STATE(xas, &folio->mapping->i_pages, folio->index);
>>>>>>> @@ -3809,14 +3808,12 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
>>>>>>> * is taken to serialise against parallel split or collapse
>>>>>>> * operations.
>>>>>>> */
>>>>>>> - if (!unmapped) {
>>>>>>> - anon_vma = folio_get_anon_vma(folio);
>>>>>>> - if (!anon_vma) {
>>>>>>> - ret = -EBUSY;
>>>>>>> - goto out;
>>>>>>> - }
>>>>>>> - anon_vma_lock_write(anon_vma);
>>>>>>> + anon_vma = folio_get_anon_vma(folio);
>>>>>>> + if (!anon_vma) {
>>>>>>> + ret = -EBUSY;
>>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> + anon_vma_lock_write(anon_vma);
>>>>>>> mapping = NULL;
>>>>>>> } else {
>>>>>>> unsigned int min_order;
>>>>>>> @@ -3882,8 +3879,7 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
>>>>>>> goto out_unlock;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>> - if (!unmapped)
>>>>>>> - unmap_folio(folio);
>>>>>>> + unmap_folio(folio);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hm, I would have hoped that we could factor out the core logic and reuse it for the new helper, instead of duplicating code.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did you look into that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I did, I ended up with larger spaghetti, I was hoping to look it as a follow up
>>>>> after the series with the mTHP changes and support (that is to be designed and
>>>>> prototyped).
>>>>
>>>> Looking at it in more detail, the code duplication is not desired.
>>>>
>>>> We have to find a way to factor the existing code out and reuse it from any new function.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I came up with a helper, but that ends up with another boolean do_lru.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Zi, David, any opinions on the approach below?
>
> Looks good to me. We might want a better name instead of
> __folio_split_unmapped(). Or __split_unmapped_folio() should
> be renamed, since these two function names are too similar.
>
> Maybe __folio_split_unmapped() -> __freeze_and_split_unmapped_folio().
>
> Feel free to come up with a better name. :)
>
I had __folio_split_unfreeze() to indicate we split the folio and unfreeze at the end, but
it does not reflect that we freeze it as well. Looks like we are trending towards folio_split
as the prefix (IIUC Dave correctly), I like your name, but if folio_split is going to be
required then may be __folio_split_unmapped_unfreeze()?
[...]
Balbir
Powered by blists - more mailing lists