Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-3840-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3774.300.61.1.2\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH WIP v1 07/20] mm/rmap_id: track if one ore multiple MMs
 map a partially-mappable folio
From: Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <944d990f-3c98-4ade-8176-4e4b25eae0b8@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2023 16:34:42 +0200
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
 linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
 Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
 Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
 Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
 Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>,
 Yang Shi <shy828301@gmail.com>,
 Ying Huang <ying.huang@intel.com>,
 Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
 Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
 Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
 Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <4FFED5A1-BF86-480D-8CB7-BECE5C413B44@gmail.com>
References: <20231124132626.235350-1-david@redhat.com>
 <20231124132626.235350-8-david@redhat.com>
 <F5EF2C8E-2902-447C-BD97-05AF6FF8832D@gmail.com>
 <944d990f-3c98-4ade-8176-4e4b25eae0b8@redhat.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>


> On Dec 18, 2023, at 4:04=E2=80=AFPM, David Hildenbrand =
<david@redhat.com> wrote:
>=20
> But adding 1 "0" bit is not sufficient for handling order-2 folios (P =
=3D 4), only for handling order-1 folios. So what the current approach =
does is the following (P =3D 4):
>=20
> RMAP-ID |       | Subid |
> -----------------------------------
> 0       | 0000 | 0     | 0000 0000
> 1       | 0001 | 1     | 0000 0001
> 2       | 0010 | 5     | 0000 0101
> 3       | 0011 | 6     | 0000 0110
> 4       | 0100 | 25    | 0001 1001
> 5       | 0101 | 26    | 0001 1010
> 6       | 0110 | 30    | 0001 1110
> 7       | 0111 | 31    | 0001 1111
> 8       | 1000 | 125   | 0111 1101
> 9       | 1001 | 126   | 0111 1110
> 10      | 1010 | 130   | 1000 0010
> 11      | 1011 | 131   | 1000 0011
> 12      | 1100 | 150   | 1001 0110
> 13      | 1101 | 151   | 1001 0111
> 14      | 1110 | 155   | 1001 1011
> 15      | 1111 | 156   | 1001 1100

Yes, of course. Silly me. You want to take advantage of the counter not
saturating for orders K where K-1 is not a power of 2.

I get your point. Not sure whether it worth the complexity though=E2=80=A6=