linux-kernel - [PATCH] mm: folio_zero_user: (fixup) cache page ranges

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

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20260108060406.1693853-1-ankur.a.arora@oracle.com>
Date: Wed,  7 Jan 2026 22:04:06 -0800
From: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, x86@...nel.org
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com, mingo@...hat.com,
        mjguzik@...il.com, luto@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
        tglx@...utronix.de, willy@...radead.org, raghavendra.kt@....com,
        chleroy@...nel.org, ioworker0@...il.com, lizhe.67@...edance.com,
        boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com,
        ankur.a.arora@...cle.com
Subject: [PATCH] mm: folio_zero_user: (fixup) cache page ranges

Move the unit computation and make it a const. Also, clean up the
comment a little bit.

Use SZ_32M to define PROCESS_PAGES_NON_PREEMPT_BATCH instead
of hand coding the computation.

Signed-off-by: Ankur Arora <ankur.a.arora@...cle.com>
---

Hi Andrew

Could you fixup patch-7 "mm: folio_zero_user: clear page ranges" with
this patch?

Thanks
Ankur

---
 include/linux/mm.h |  2 +-
 mm/memory.c        | 20 ++++++++++----------
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
index c1ff832c33b5..e8bb09816fbf 100644
--- a/include/linux/mm.h
+++ b/include/linux/mm.h
@@ -4238,7 +4238,7 @@ static inline void clear_pages(void *addr, unsigned int npages)
  * (See comment above clear_pages() for why preemption latency is a concern
  * here.)
  */
-#define PROCESS_PAGES_NON_PREEMPT_BATCH		(32 << (20 - PAGE_SHIFT))
+#define PROCESS_PAGES_NON_PREEMPT_BATCH		(SZ_32M >> PAGE_SHIFT)
 #else /* !clear_pages */
 /*
  * The architecture does not provide a clear_pages() implementation. Assume
diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
index 11ad1db61929..f80c67eba79f 100644
--- a/mm/memory.c
+++ b/mm/memory.c
@@ -7240,19 +7240,19 @@ static inline int process_huge_page(
 static void clear_contig_highpages(struct page *page, unsigned long addr,
 				   unsigned int nr_pages)
 {
-	unsigned int i, unit, count;
-
-	might_sleep();
+	unsigned int i, count;
 	/*
-	 * When clearing we want to operate on the largest extent possible since
-	 * that allows for extent based architecture specific optimizations.
+	 * When clearing we want to operate on the largest extent possible to
+	 * allow for architecture specific extent based optimizations.
 	 *
-	 * However, since the clearing interfaces (clear_user_highpages(),
-	 * clear_user_pages(), clear_pages()), do not call cond_resched(), we
-	 * limit the batch size when running under non-preemptible scheduling
-	 * models.
+	 * However, since clear_user_highpages() (and primitives clear_user_pages(),
+	 * clear_pages()), do not call cond_resched(), limit the unit size when
+	 * running under non-preemptible scheduling models.
 	 */
-	unit = preempt_model_preemptible() ? nr_pages : PROCESS_PAGES_NON_PREEMPT_BATCH;
+	const unsigned int unit = preempt_model_preemptible() ?
+				   nr_pages : PROCESS_PAGES_NON_PREEMPT_BATCH;
+
+	might_sleep();
 
 	for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i += count) {
 		cond_resched();
-- 
2.31.1