On 4/7/23 12:23 PM, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 at 23:12, Muhammad Usama Anjum
> <usama.anjum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 4/7/23 1:12 AM, Michał Mirosław wrote:
>>> On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 at 09:40, Muhammad Usama Anjum
>>> <usama.anjum@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>> --- a/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
>>>> +++ b/fs/proc/task_mmu.c
>>> [...]
>>>> +static int pagemap_scan_pmd_entry(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long start,
>>>> + unsigned long end, struct mm_walk *walk)
>>>> +{
> [...]
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
>>>> + ptl = pmd_trans_huge_lock(pmd, vma);
>>>> + if (ptl) {
>>> [...]
>>>> + return ret;
>>>> + }
>>>> +process_smaller_pages:
>>>> + if (pmd_trans_unstable(pmd))
>>>> + return 0;
>>>
>>> Why pmd_trans_unstable() is needed here and not only after split_huge_pmd()?
>> I'm not entirely sure. But the idea is if THP is unstable, we should
>> return. As it doesn't seem like after splitting THP can be unstable, we
>> should not check it. Do you agree with the following?
>
> The description of pmd_trans_unstable() [1] seems to indicate that it
> is needed only after split_huge_pmd().
>
> [1] https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc5/source/include/linux/pgtable.h#L1394
Sorry, yeah pmd_trans_unstable() is need after split. But it is also needed
in normal case when ptl is NULL to rule out the case if pmd is unstable
before performing operation on normal pages:
ptl = pmd_trans_huge_lock(pmd, vma);
if (ptl) {
...
}
if (pmd_trans_unstable(pmd))
return 0;
This file has usage examples of pmd_trans_unstable():
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc5/source/fs/proc/task_mmu.c#L634
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc5/source/fs/proc/task_mmu.c#L1195
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc5/source/fs/proc/task_mmu.c#L1543
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc5/source/fs/proc/task_mmu.c#L1887
So we are good with what we have in this patch.
>
> Best Regards
> Michał Mirosław
--
BR,
Muhammad Usama Anjum
