Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-110459-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 17:04:05 +0000
From: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
To: Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, kent.overstreet@linux.dev, mhocko@suse.com,
	vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org, roman.gushchin@linux.dev,
	mgorman@suse.de, dave@stgolabs.net, liam.howlett@oracle.com,
	penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp, corbet@lwn.net,
	void@manifault.com, peterz@infradead.org, juri.lelli@redhat.com,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de,
	tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
	x86@kernel.org, peterx@redhat.com, david@redhat.com,
	axboe@kernel.dk, mcgrof@kernel.org, masahiroy@kernel.org,
	nathan@kernel.org, dennis@kernel.org, jhubbard@nvidia.com,
	tj@kernel.org, muchun.song@linux.dev, rppt@kernel.org,
	paulmck@kernel.org, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com,
	yosryahmed@google.com, yuzhao@google.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
	hughd@google.com, andreyknvl@gmail.com, keescook@chromium.org,
	ndesaulniers@google.com, vvvvvv@google.com,
	gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, ebiggers@google.com, ytcoode@gmail.com,
	vincent.guittot@linaro.org, dietmar.eggemann@arm.com,
	rostedt@goodmis.org, bsegall@google.com, bristot@redhat.com,
	vschneid@redhat.com, cl@linux.com, penberg@kernel.org,
	iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, 42.hyeyoo@gmail.com, glider@google.com,
	elver@google.com, dvyukov@google.com, songmuchun@bytedance.com,
	jbaron@akamai.com, aliceryhl@google.com, rientjes@google.com,
	minchan@google.com, kaleshsingh@google.com, kernel-team@android.com,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-modules@vger.kernel.org, kasan-dev@googlegroups.com,
	cgroups@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 20/37] mm: fix non-compound multi-order memory
 accounting in __free_pages
Message-ID: <ZfxohXDDCx-_cJYa@casper.infradead.org>
References: <20240321163705.3067592-1-surenb@google.com>
 <20240321163705.3067592-21-surenb@google.com>
 <Zfxk9aFhF7O_-T3c@casper.infradead.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <Zfxk9aFhF7O_-T3c@casper.infradead.org>

On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 04:48:53PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2024 at 09:36:42AM -0700, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -4700,12 +4700,15 @@ void __free_pages(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
> >  {
> >  	/* get PageHead before we drop reference */
> >  	int head = PageHead(page);
> > +	struct alloc_tag *tag = pgalloc_tag_get(page);
> >  
> >  	if (put_page_testzero(page))
> >  		free_the_page(page, order);
> > -	else if (!head)
> > +	else if (!head) {
> > +		pgalloc_tag_sub_pages(tag, (1 << order) - 1);
> >  		while (order-- > 0)
> >  			free_the_page(page + (1 << order), order);
> > +	}
> 
> Why do you need these new functions instead of just:
> 
> +	else if (!head) {
> +		pgalloc_tag_sub(page, (1 << order) - 1);
> 		while (order-- > 0)
> 			free_the_page(page + (1 << order), order);
> +	}

Actually, I'm not sure this is safe (I don't fully understand codetags,
so it may be safe).  What can happen is that the put_page() can come in
before the pgalloc_tag_sub(), and then that page can be allocated again.  
Will that cause confusion?