On 11.07.24 23:03, David Hildenbrand wrote:
On 11.07.24 22:46, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 08:48:40PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -136,7 +136,8 @@ unsigned long __thp_vma_allowable_orders(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
while (orders) {
addr = vma->vm_end - (PAGE_SIZE << order);
- if (thp_vma_suitable_order(vma, addr, order))
+ if (!(vma->vm_file && order > MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER) &&
+ thp_vma_suitable_order(vma, addr, order))
break;
Why does 'orders' even contain potential orders that are larger than
MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER?
We do this at the top:
orders &= vma_is_anonymous(vma) ?
THP_ORDERS_ALL_ANON : THP_ORDERS_ALL_FILE;
include/linux/huge_mm.h:#define THP_ORDERS_ALL_FILE (BIT(PMD_ORDER) | BIT(PUD_ORDER))
... and that seems very wrong. We support all kinds of orders for
files, not just PMD order. We don't support PUD order at all.
What the hell is going on here?
yes, that's just absolutely confusing. I mentioned it to Ryan lately
that we should clean that up (I wanted to look into that, but am happy
if someone else can help).
There should likely be different defines for
DAX (PMD|PUD)
SHMEM (PMD) -- but soon more. Not sure if we want separate ANON_SHMEM
for the time being. Hm. But shmem is already handles separately, so
maybe we can just ignore shmem here.
Correction: of course <= MAX_PAGECACHE_ORDER
But yeah, this needs cleanups
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
