On 16 Feb 2025, at 5:32, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 11.02.25 16:50, Zi Yan wrote: >> folio_split() splits a large folio in the same way as buddy allocator >> splits a large free page for allocation. The purpose is to minimize the >> number of folios after the split. For example, if user wants to free the >> 3rd subpage in a order-9 folio, folio_split() will split the order-9 folio >> as: >> O-0, O-0, O-0, O-0, O-2, O-3, O-4, O-5, O-6, O-7, O-8 if it is anon, >> since anon folio does not support order-1 yet. >> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> | | | | | | | | | >> |O-0|O-0|O-0|O-0| O-2 |...| O-7 | O-8 | >> | | | | | | | | | >> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> O-1, O-0, O-0, O-2, O-3, O-4, O-5, O-6, O-7, O-9 if it is pagecache >> --------------------------------------------------------------- >> | | | | | | | | >> | O-1 |O-0|O-0| O-2 |...| O-7 | O-8 | >> | | | | | | | | >> --------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> It generates fewer folios (i.e., 11 or 10) than existing page split >> approach, which splits the order-9 to 512 order-0 folios. It also reduces >> the number of new xa_node needed during a pagecache folio split from >> 8 to 1, potentially decreasing the folio split failure rate due to memory >> constraints. >> >> folio_split() and existing split_huge_page_to_list_to_order() share >> the folio unmapping and remapping code in __folio_split() and the common >> backend split code in __split_unmapped_folio() using >> uniform_split variable to distinguish their operations. >> >> uniform_split_supported() and non_uniform_split_supported() are added >> to factor out check code and will be used outside __folio_split() in the >> following commit. >> >> Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> mm/huge_memory.c | 137 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- >> 1 file changed, 100 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c >> index 21ebe2dec5a4..400dfe8a6e60 100644 >> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c >> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c >> @@ -3853,12 +3853,68 @@ static int __split_unmapped_folio(struct folio *folio, int new_order, >> return ret; >> } >> +static bool non_uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order, >> + bool warns) >> +{ >> + /* order-1 is not supported for anonymous THP. */ >> + if (folio_test_anon(folio) && new_order == 1) { >> + VM_WARN_ONCE(warns, "Cannot split to order-1 folio"); >> + return false; >> + } >> + >> + /* >> + * No split if the file system does not support large folio. >> + * Note that we might still have THPs in such mappings due to >> + * CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS. But in that case, the mapping >> + * does not actually support large folios properly. >> + */ >> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS) && >> + !mapping_large_folio_support(folio->mapping)) { > > In this (and a similar case below), you need > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS) && > !folio_test_anon(folio) && > !mapping_large_folio_support(folio->mapping)) { > > Otherwise mapping_large_folio_support() is unhappy: > Thanks. The patch below should fix it. I am going to send V8, since 1. there have been 4 fixes so far for V7, a new series would help people review; 2. based on the discussion with you in THP cabal meeting, to convert split_huge_page*() to use __folio_split(), the current __folio_split() interface becomes awkward. Two changes are needed: a) use in folio offset instead of struct page, since even in truncate_inode_partial_folio() I needed to convert in folio offset struct page to use my current interface; b) split_huge_page*()'s caller might hold the page lock at a non-head page, so an additional keep_lock_at_in_folio_offset is needed to indicate which after-split folio should be kept locked after split is done.