Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:a841:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id d1csp5028619pxy; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 19:07:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy9Ff9GpIeSWNRtieWBZh/ppYXVIljavSlHAK2NdfQLY7gzX6T+wqUTIS7wHfR1Z6t739xy X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:760a:: with SMTP id jx10mr26907306ejc.126.1619575672992; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 19:07:52 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1619575672; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=EflfWc0DpzEIMJ38pp4vWrZF/JlO/bKFzgtuPzDJaDyXYq7KzF4i8G7Ip+L1pfh9Tz jnZRqDU7KEpMVbEIGsXKxntBxzB1Ez0ZSkyrSSES320a26ZyAf3FYTPX/4P2Iao1ygBV NIWv9+pHiFbcA54VHXCYddmBf/f/eBFIz7JSzJZMEUCDdRLjJNRMh6HNhHOEshxJe99E Uhddqm9i5395FXXn0U4JPqkwoXfnw5IXaz5zoX3NY1VmKaEk7FI4XdEbdUhbCXUW2/M4 reWyKitjCD3FOXRrWSz2oydWQJPc2404Nj0PmLWLsU2522GKfZRTa4wUSEUKSmJv18We tFmg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references :cc:to:subject; bh=ssrwYzbyCt2hhfvO18D4s3aETiHZAYDJT2JcOdeQkxk=; b=W/qoR29fqI04kxXbAx7/JPjnUtuOcmesTwq5p8MERZUEAgpSZzVS4ulppQg3iEt/Pq mJghV+4qke6tRv9W/H9ZTW1jvz8Irc8Il/C0hCo/b2dq9hcVqVX+wKm5Spb98gRWakNq 0juO2hPL5mddkJK0oi8jCaGCc024gkjUDU8CCnG2/i1TzWKgTZvaiGDaEClSaX7jBNLP n9tlLXmqXjeK0nLAhZTkqZfmrZrmXZcP+EdWZwn3mVze07N8xCa+IyCRLK5GfJRaEcRe aUqKtfG4Bs5D1vgKj1/xWDe2YaEfPPF1Mq08nVdIWgOATcDZUmOGwhCB3AqPyMZPasiI fNYg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=huawei.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id jo9si1351869ejb.552.2021.04.27.19.07.29; Tue, 27 Apr 2021 19:07:52 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=huawei.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239569AbhD1CHZ (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 27 Apr 2021 22:07:25 -0400 Received: from szxga05-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.191]:16492 "EHLO szxga05-in.huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239555AbhD1CHY (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2021 22:07:24 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS411-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.60]) by szxga05-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4FVMPk4GYMzrhRK; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 10:04:10 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.176.174] (10.174.176.174) by DGGEMS411-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.211) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.498.0; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 10:06:36 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] mm/huge_memory.c: add missing read-only THP checking in transparent_hugepage_enabled() To: Yang Shi CC: Andrew Morton , Zi Yan , , Matthew Wilcox , "Yang Shi" , , "Ralph Campbell" , Song Liu , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Rik van Riel , Johannes Weiner , Minchan Kim , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux MM References: <20210427133214.2270207-1-linmiaohe@huawei.com> <20210427133214.2270207-4-linmiaohe@huawei.com> From: Miaohe Lin Message-ID: <1fa95721-2ae0-af5f-b2e4-cdb430ebc263@huawei.com> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 10:06:36 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.176.174] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2021/4/28 5:03, Yang Shi wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 6:32 AM Miaohe Lin wrote: >> >> Since commit 99cb0dbd47a1 ("mm,thp: add read-only THP support for >> (non-shmem) FS"), read-only THP file mapping is supported. But it >> forgot to add checking for it in transparent_hugepage_enabled(). >> >> Fixes: 99cb0dbd47a1 ("mm,thp: add read-only THP support for (non-shmem) FS") >> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin >> --- >> mm/huge_memory.c | 3 +++ >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c >> index 76ca1eb2a223..aa22a0ae9894 100644 >> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c >> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c >> @@ -74,6 +74,9 @@ bool transparent_hugepage_enabled(struct vm_area_struct *vma) >> return __transparent_hugepage_enabled(vma); >> if (vma_is_shmem(vma)) >> return shmem_huge_enabled(vma); >> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS) && vma->vm_file && >> + (vma->vm_flags & VM_DENYWRITE)) >> + return true; > Many thanks for your quick respond and Reviewed-by tag! > I don't think this change is correct. This function is used to > indicate if allocating THP is eligible for the VMAs or not showed by > smap. And currently readonly FS THP is collapsed by khugepaged only. > > So, you need check if the vma is suitable for khugepaged. Take a look > at what hugepage_vma_check() does. > > And, the new patch > (https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20210406000930.3455850-1-cfijalkovich@google.com/) > relax the constraints for readonly FS THP, it might be already in -mm > tree, so you need adopt the new condition as well. > Many thanks for your comment. I referred to what hugepage_vma_check() does about Read-only file mappings when I came up this patch. But it seems I am miss something. Take the new patch into account, the check for READ_ONLY_THP now should be: diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c index 76ca1eb2a223..a46a558233b4 100644 --- a/mm/huge_memory.c +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c @@ -74,6 +74,10 @@ bool transparent_hugepage_enabled(struct vm_area_struct *vma) return __transparent_hugepage_enabled(vma); if (vma_is_shmem(vma)) return shmem_huge_enabled(vma); + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS) && vma->vm_file && + !inode_is_open_for_write(vma->vm_file->f_inode) && + (vma->vm_flags & VM_EXEC)) + return true; return false; } Am I miss something about checking for READ_ONLY_THP case? Or READ_ONLY_THP case is ok but other case is missed? Could you please explain this more detailed for me? Many thanks! >> >> return false; >> } > >> -- >> 2.23.0 >> >> > > . >