On Sat, Nov 04, 2023 at 11:55:18AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: > -/* Decides whether we should zap this page with the page pointer specified */ > -static inline bool should_zap_page(struct zap_details *details, struct page *page) > +/* Decides whether we should zap this folio with the folio pointer specified */ > +static inline bool should_zap_page(struct zap_details *details, struct folio *folio) Surely we should rename this to should_zap_folio()? > @@ -1487,10 +1492,10 @@ static unsigned long zap_pte_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb, > * see zap_install_uffd_wp_if_needed(). > */ > WARN_ON_ONCE(!vma_is_anonymous(vma)); > - rss[mm_counter(page)]--; > + rss[mm_counter(&folio->page)]--; > if (is_device_private_entry(entry)) > - page_remove_rmap(page, vma, false); > - put_page(page); > + page_remove_rmap(&folio->page, vma, false); > + folio_put(folio); This is wrong. If we have a PTE-mapped THP, you'll remove the head page N times instead of removing each of N pages. I suspect you're going to collide with Ryan's work by doing this ...
