On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 02:18:10PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 17.04.24 14:09, Oscar Salvador wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 11:23:13AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > Let's get rid of another page_mapcount() check and simply use > > > folio_likely_mapped_shared(), which is precise for hugetlb folios. > > > > > > While at it, use huge_ptep_get() + pte_page() instead of ptep_get() + > > > vm_normal_page(), just like we do in pagemap_hugetlb_range(). > > > > That is fine because vm_normal_page() tries to be clever about mappings which > > hugetlb does not support, right? > > Right, using vm_normal_page() is even completely bogus. Usually (but not > always) we have PMDs/PUDs and not PTEs for mapping hugetlb pages -- where > vm_normal_folio_pmd() would be the right thing to do. > > That's also the reason why hugetlb.c has not a single user of > vm_normal_page() and friends ... it doesn't apply to hugetlb, but likely > also isn't currently harmful to use it. I guess not because we skip the special handling, but I agree that replacing it is the right thing to do. Thanks for explaining! -- Oscar Salvador SUSE Labs
