Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-173908-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
From: Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com,
	chrisl@kernel.org,
	david@redhat.com,
	hanchuanhua@oppo.com,
	hannes@cmpxchg.org,
	hughd@google.com,
	kasong@tencent.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	ryan.roberts@arm.com,
	surenb@google.com,
	v-songbaohua@oppo.com,
	willy@infradead.org,
	xiang@kernel.org,
	ying.huang@intel.com,
	yosryahmed@google.com,
	yuzhao@google.com,
	ziy@nvidia.com
Subject: [PATCH v4 5/6] mm: swap: make should_try_to_free_swap() support large-folio
Date: Thu,  9 May 2024 10:40:39 +1200
Message-Id: <20240508224040.190469-6-21cnbao@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240508224040.190469-1-21cnbao@gmail.com>
References: <20240508224040.190469-1-21cnbao@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

From: Chuanhua Han <hanchuanhua@oppo.com>

The function should_try_to_free_swap() operates under the assumption
that swap-in always occurs at the normal page granularity,
i.e., folio_nr_pages() = 1. However, in reality, for large folios,
add_to_swap_cache() will invoke folio_ref_add(folio, nr).  To accommodate
large folio swap-in, this patch eliminates this assumption.

Signed-off-by: Chuanhua Han <hanchuanhua@oppo.com>
Co-developed-by: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>
Signed-off-by: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com>
Acked-by: Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Reviewed-by: "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
 mm/memory.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
index b51c059af0b0..d9434df24d62 100644
--- a/mm/memory.c
+++ b/mm/memory.c
@@ -3877,7 +3877,7 @@ static inline bool should_try_to_free_swap(struct folio *folio,
 	 * reference only in case it's likely that we'll be the exlusive user.
 	 */
 	return (fault_flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE) && !folio_test_ksm(folio) &&
-		folio_ref_count(folio) == 2;
+		folio_ref_count(folio) == (1 + folio_nr_pages(folio));
 }
 
 static vm_fault_t pte_marker_clear(struct vm_fault *vmf)
-- 
2.34.1