Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
Date:   Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:37:18 -0500
From:   Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
To:     Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@kvack.org" <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>,
        Lorenzo Stoakes <lstoakes@gmail.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@google.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
        Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 06/12] mm/gup: Drop folio_fast_pin_allowed() in
 hugepd processing
Message-ID: <ZV-p7haI5SmIYACs@x1n>
References: <20231116012908.392077-1-peterx@redhat.com>
 <20231116012908.392077-7-peterx@redhat.com>
 <ZVsYMMJpmFV2T/Zc@infradead.org>
 <ZVzT5_3Zn-Y-6xth@x1n>
 <ZV21GCbG48nTLDzn@infradead.org>
 <ZV4co7wcI-_wK91F@x1n>
 <57be0ed0-f1d7-4583-9a5f-3ed7deb0ea97@csgroup.eu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <57be0ed0-f1d7-4583-9a5f-3ed7deb0ea97@csgroup.eu>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 06:22:33PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> > For fast-gup I think the hugepd code is in use, however for walk_page_*
> > apis hugepd code shouldn't be reached iiuc as we have the hugetlb specific
> > handling (walk_hugetlb_range()), so anything within walk_pgd_range() to hit
> > a hugepd can be dead code to me (but note that this "dead code" is good
> > stuff to me, if one would like to merge hugetlb instead into generic mm).
> 
> Not sure what you mean here. What do you mean by "dead code" ?
> A hugepage directory can be plugged at any page level, from PGD to PMD.
> So the following bit in walk_pgd_range() is valid and not dead:
> 
> 		if (is_hugepd(__hugepd(pgd_val(*pgd))))
> 			err = walk_hugepd_range((hugepd_t *)pgd, addr, next, walk, PGDIR_SHIFT);

IMHO it boils down to the question on whether hugepd is only used in
hugetlbfs.  I think I already mentioned that above, but I can be more
explicit; what I see is that from higher stack in __walk_page_range():

	if (is_vm_hugetlb_page(vma)) {
		if (ops->hugetlb_entry)
			err = walk_hugetlb_range(start, end, walk);
	} else
		err = walk_pgd_range(start, end, walk);

It means to me as long as the vma is hugetlb, it'll not trigger any code in
walk_pgd_range(), but only walk_hugetlb_range().  Do you perhaps mean
hugepd is used outside hugetlbfs?

Thanks,

-- 
Peter Xu