The page should not a tail page in free_pages_prepare(), let's use
a folio in free_pages_prepare() to save several compound_head() calls.
Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
---
mm/page_alloc.c | 15 ++++++++-------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 06be8821d833..a888b9d57751 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -1070,6 +1070,7 @@ static __always_inline bool free_pages_prepare(struct page *page,
unsigned int order, fpi_t fpi_flags)
{
int bad = 0;
+ struct folio *folio = page_folio(page);
bool skip_kasan_poison = should_skip_kasan_poison(page, fpi_flags);
bool init = want_init_on_free();
@@ -1078,12 +1079,12 @@ static __always_inline bool free_pages_prepare(struct page *page,
trace_mm_page_free(page, order);
kmsan_free_page(page, order);
- if (unlikely(PageHWPoison(page)) && !order) {
+ if (unlikely(folio_test_hwpoison(folio)) && !order) {
/*
* Do not let hwpoison pages hit pcplists/buddy
* Untie memcg state and reset page's owner
*/
- if (memcg_kmem_online() && PageMemcgKmem(page))
+ if (memcg_kmem_online() && folio_memcg_kmem(folio))
__memcg_kmem_uncharge_page(page, order);
reset_page_owner(page, order);
page_table_check_free(page, order);
@@ -1095,10 +1096,10 @@ static __always_inline bool free_pages_prepare(struct page *page,
* avoid checking PageCompound for order-0 pages.
*/
if (unlikely(order)) {
- bool compound = PageCompound(page);
+ bool compound = folio_test_large(folio);
int i;
- VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(compound && compound_order(page) != order, page);
+ VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(compound && folio_order(folio) != order, folio);
if (compound)
page[1].flags &= ~PAGE_FLAGS_SECOND;
@@ -1114,9 +1115,9 @@ static __always_inline bool free_pages_prepare(struct page *page,
(page + i)->flags &= ~PAGE_FLAGS_CHECK_AT_PREP;
}
}
- if (PageMappingFlags(page))
+ if (folio_mapping_flags(folio))
page->mapping = NULL;
- if (memcg_kmem_online() && PageMemcgKmem(page))
+ if (memcg_kmem_online() && folio_memcg_kmem(folio))
__memcg_kmem_uncharge_page(page, order);
if (is_check_pages_enabled()) {
if (free_page_is_bad(page))
@@ -1130,7 +1131,7 @@ static __always_inline bool free_pages_prepare(struct page *page,
reset_page_owner(page, order);
page_table_check_free(page, order);
- if (!PageHighMem(page)) {
+ if (!folio_test_highmem(folio)) {
debug_check_no_locks_freed(page_address(page),
PAGE_SIZE << order);
debug_check_no_obj_freed(page_address(page),
--
2.27.0
On 2023/9/26 15:49, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 26.09.23 02:52, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>> The page should not a tail page in free_pages_prepare(), let's use
>> a folio in free_pages_prepare() to save several compound_head() calls.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> mm/page_alloc.c | 15 ++++++++-------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> index 06be8821d833..a888b9d57751 100644
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -1070,6 +1070,7 @@ static __always_inline bool
>> free_pages_prepare(struct page *page,
>> unsigned int order, fpi_t fpi_flags)
>> {
>> int bad = 0;
>> + struct folio *folio = page_folio(page);
>
> We might have higher-order pages here that are not folios (not compound
> pages). It looks a bit like this function really shouldn't be working
> with folios in the generic way, for that reason.
>
> Wrong level of abstraction in that function.
Thanks for your point this, also the change also looks unnecessary too,
the main purpose to use a folio in this function is prepared for
converting page_cpupid_reset_last() to folio, as the higher-order pages
the next patch is not right, I will reconsider it.
>
> What am I missing?
>
On 26.09.23 02:52, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> The page should not a tail page in free_pages_prepare(), let's use
> a folio in free_pages_prepare() to save several compound_head() calls.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
> ---
> mm/page_alloc.c | 15 ++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index 06be8821d833..a888b9d57751 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -1070,6 +1070,7 @@ static __always_inline bool free_pages_prepare(struct page *page,
> unsigned int order, fpi_t fpi_flags)
> {
> int bad = 0;
> + struct folio *folio = page_folio(page);
We might have higher-order pages here that are not folios (not compound
pages). It looks a bit like this function really shouldn't be working
with folios in the generic way, for that reason.
Wrong level of abstraction in that function.
What am I missing?
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
Hi David and all,
On 2023/9/26 17:39, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 2023/9/26 15:49, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 26.09.23 02:52, Kefeng Wang wrote:
>>> The page should not a tail page in free_pages_prepare(), let's use
>>> a folio in free_pages_prepare() to save several compound_head() calls.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> mm/page_alloc.c | 15 ++++++++-------
>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> index 06be8821d833..a888b9d57751 100644
>>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>> @@ -1070,6 +1070,7 @@ static __always_inline bool
>>> free_pages_prepare(struct page *page,
>>> unsigned int order, fpi_t fpi_flags)
>>> {
>>> int bad = 0;
>>> + struct folio *folio = page_folio(page);
>>
>> We might have higher-order pages here that are not folios (not
>> compound pages). It looks a bit like this function really shouldn't be
>> working with folios in the generic way, for that reason.
>>
>> Wrong level of abstraction in that function.
>
> Thanks for your point this, also the change also looks unnecessary too,
> the main purpose to use a folio in this function is prepared for
> converting page_cpupid_reset_last() to folio, as the higher-order pages
> the next patch is not right, I will reconsider it.
>
As David mentioned，free_pages_prepare should not use folio, I won't to
convert page_cpupid_reset_last(), that is, only the first 7 patches are
reserved, any comments about the above patches, many thanks.