Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:5 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:5;
Date:   Sat, 4 Nov 2023 17:20:54 +0000
From:   Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To:     Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/10] mm: memory: use a folio in zap_pte_range()
Message-ID: <ZUZ9dg4YHZdUKDqO@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20231104035522.2418660-1-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
 <20231104035522.2418660-7-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231104035522.2418660-7-wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Nov 04, 2023 at 11:55:18AM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote:
> -/* Decides whether we should zap this page with the page pointer specified */
> -static inline bool should_zap_page(struct zap_details *details, struct page *page)
> +/* Decides whether we should zap this folio with the folio pointer specified */
> +static inline bool should_zap_page(struct zap_details *details, struct folio *folio)

Surely we should rename this to should_zap_folio()?

> @@ -1487,10 +1492,10 @@ static unsigned long zap_pte_range(struct mmu_gather *tlb,
>  			 * see zap_install_uffd_wp_if_needed().
>  			 */
>  			WARN_ON_ONCE(!vma_is_anonymous(vma));
> -			rss[mm_counter(page)]--;
> +			rss[mm_counter(&folio->page)]--;
>  			if (is_device_private_entry(entry))
> -				page_remove_rmap(page, vma, false);
> -			put_page(page);
> +				page_remove_rmap(&folio->page, vma, false);
> +			folio_put(folio);

This is wrong.  If we have a PTE-mapped THP, you'll remove the head page
N times instead of removing each of N pages.

I suspect you're going to collide with Ryan's work by doing this ...