On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 10:19:59AM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
> diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> index 26ab9dfc7d63..1da9a14a5513 100644
> --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
> +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
> @@ -1788,7 +1788,8 @@ static void __update_and_free_hugetlb_folio(struct hstate *h,
> destroy_compound_gigantic_folio(folio, huge_page_order(h));
> free_gigantic_folio(folio, huge_page_order(h));
> } else {
> - INIT_LIST_HEAD(&folio->_deferred_list);
> + if (!folio_test_hugetlb(folio))
> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&folio->_deferred_list);
Ok, it took me a bit to figure this out.
So we basically init __deferred_list when we know that
folio_put will not end up calling free_huge_folio
because a previous call to remove_hugetlb_folio has already cleared the
bit.
Maybe Matthew thought that any folio ending here would not end up in
free_huge_folio (which is the one fiddling subpool).
I mean, fix looks good because if hugetlb flag is cleared,
destroy_large_folio will go straight to free_the_page, but the
whole thing is a bit subtle.
And if we decide to go with this, I think we are going to need a comment
in there explaining what is going on like "only init _deferred_list if
free_huge_folio cannot be call".
--
Oscar Salvador
SUSE Labs
