Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 1 Mar 2021 20:53:06 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc:     linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/25] mm: Introduce struct folio
Message-ID: <20210301205306.GU2723601@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20210128070404.1922318-1-willy@infradead.org>
 <20210128070404.1922318-2-willy@infradead.org>
 <68723D50-AFD1-4F25-8F10-81EC11045BE5@nvidia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <68723D50-AFD1-4F25-8F10-81EC11045BE5@nvidia.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 01, 2021 at 03:26:11PM -0500, Zi Yan wrote:
> > +static inline struct folio *next_folio(struct folio *folio)
> > +{
> > +	return folio + folio_nr_pages(folio);
> 
> Are you planning to make hugetlb use folio too?

Eventually, probably.  It's not my focus.

> If yes, this might not work if we have CONFIG_SPARSEMEM && !CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
> with a hugetlb folio > MAX_ORDER, because struct page might not be virtually contiguous.
> See the experiment I did in [1].
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/16F7C58B-4D79-41C5-9B64-A1A1628F4AF2@nvidia.com/

I thought we were going to forbid that configuration?  ie no pages
larger than MAX_ORDER with (SPARSEMEM && !SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP)

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/312AECBD-CA6D-4E93-A6C1-1DF87BABD92D@nvidia.com/

is somewhere else we were discussing this.