* [PATCH v2 1/5] mm: Separate folio_split_memcg_refs() from split_page_memcg()
2025-03-14 13:36 [PATCH v2 0/5] Minor memcg cleanups & prep for memdescs Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-14 13:36 ` Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-14 21:49 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-03-18 3:14 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: Simplify split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
` (4 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) @ 2025-03-14 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan, David Hildenbrand
Folios always use memcg_data to refer to the mem_cgroup while pages
allocated with GFP_ACCOUNT have a pointer to the obj_cgroup. Since the
caller already knows what it has, split the function into two and then
we don't need to check.
Move the assignment of split folio memcg_data to the point where we set
up the other parts of the new folio. That leaves folio_split_memcg_refs()
just handling the memcg accounting.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
---
include/linux/memcontrol.h | 7 +++++++
mm/huge_memory.c | 16 ++++------------
mm/memcontrol.c | 17 +++++++++++++----
3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
index 57664e2a8fb7..d090089c5497 100644
--- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
+++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
@@ -1039,6 +1039,8 @@ static inline void memcg_memory_event_mm(struct mm_struct *mm,
}
void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_order);
+void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio, unsigned old_order,
+ unsigned new_order);
static inline u64 cgroup_id_from_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
{
@@ -1463,6 +1465,11 @@ static inline void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_or
{
}
+static inline void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio,
+ unsigned old_order, unsigned new_order)
+{
+}
+
static inline u64 cgroup_id_from_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
{
return 0;
diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index 14b1963898a7..3e5ecc8f3d13 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -3394,6 +3394,9 @@ static void __split_folio_to_order(struct folio *folio, int old_order,
folio_set_young(new_folio);
if (folio_test_idle(folio))
folio_set_idle(new_folio);
+#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
+ new_folio->memcg_data = folio->memcg_data;
+#endif
folio_xchg_last_cpupid(new_folio, folio_last_cpupid(folio));
}
@@ -3525,18 +3528,7 @@ static int __split_unmapped_folio(struct folio *folio, int new_order,
}
}
- /*
- * Reset any memcg data overlay in the tail pages.
- * folio_nr_pages() is unreliable until prep_compound_page()
- * was called again.
- */
-#ifdef NR_PAGES_IN_LARGE_FOLIO
- folio->_nr_pages = 0;
-#endif
-
-
- /* complete memcg works before add pages to LRU */
- split_page_memcg(&folio->page, old_order, split_order);
+ folio_split_memcg_refs(folio, old_order, split_order);
split_page_owner(&folio->page, old_order, split_order);
pgalloc_tag_split(folio, old_order, split_order);
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 87544df4c3b8..4674d9815a50 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -3101,10 +3101,19 @@ void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_order)
for (i = new_nr; i < old_nr; i += new_nr)
folio_page(folio, i)->memcg_data = folio->memcg_data;
- if (folio_memcg_kmem(folio))
- obj_cgroup_get_many(__folio_objcg(folio), old_nr / new_nr - 1);
- else
- css_get_many(&folio_memcg(folio)->css, old_nr / new_nr - 1);
+ obj_cgroup_get_many(__folio_objcg(folio), old_nr / new_nr - 1);
+}
+
+void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio, unsigned old_order,
+ unsigned new_order)
+{
+ unsigned new_refs;
+
+ if (mem_cgroup_disabled() || !folio_memcg_charged(folio))
+ return;
+
+ new_refs = (1 << (old_order - new_order)) - 1;
+ css_get_many(&__folio_memcg(folio)->css, new_refs);
}
unsigned long mem_cgroup_usage(struct mem_cgroup *memcg, bool swap)
--
2.47.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] mm: Separate folio_split_memcg_refs() from split_page_memcg()
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] mm: Separate folio_split_memcg_refs() from split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-14 21:49 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-03-14 23:15 ` Zi Yan
2025-03-18 3:14 ` Roman Gushchin
1 sibling, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand @ 2025-03-14 21:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle), Andrew Morton, Zi Yan
Cc: linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song
On 14.03.25 14:36, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> Folios always use memcg_data to refer to the mem_cgroup while pages
> allocated with GFP_ACCOUNT have a pointer to the obj_cgroup. Since the
> caller already knows what it has, split the function into two and then
> we don't need to check.
>
> Move the assignment of split folio memcg_data to the point where we set
> up the other parts of the new folio. That leaves folio_split_memcg_refs()
> just handling the memcg accounting.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
> ---
> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 7 +++++++
> mm/huge_memory.c | 16 ++++------------
> mm/memcontrol.c | 17 +++++++++++++----
> 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> index 57664e2a8fb7..d090089c5497 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
> @@ -1039,6 +1039,8 @@ static inline void memcg_memory_event_mm(struct mm_struct *mm,
> }
>
> void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_order);
> +void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio, unsigned old_order,
> + unsigned new_order);
>
> static inline u64 cgroup_id_from_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
> {
> @@ -1463,6 +1465,11 @@ static inline void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_or
> {
> }
>
> +static inline void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio,
> + unsigned old_order, unsigned new_order)
> +{
> +}
> +
> static inline u64 cgroup_id_from_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
> {
> return 0;
> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
> index 14b1963898a7..3e5ecc8f3d13 100644
> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
> @@ -3394,6 +3394,9 @@ static void __split_folio_to_order(struct folio *folio, int old_order,
> folio_set_young(new_folio);
> if (folio_test_idle(folio))
> folio_set_idle(new_folio);
> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
> + new_folio->memcg_data = folio->memcg_data;
> +#endif
>
> folio_xchg_last_cpupid(new_folio, folio_last_cpupid(folio));
> }
> @@ -3525,18 +3528,7 @@ static int __split_unmapped_folio(struct folio *folio, int new_order,
> }
> }
>
> - /*
> - * Reset any memcg data overlay in the tail pages.
> - * folio_nr_pages() is unreliable until prep_compound_page()
> - * was called again.
> - */
> -#ifdef NR_PAGES_IN_LARGE_FOLIO
> - folio->_nr_pages = 0;
> -#endif
I remember that we could trigger a warning without that, but I don't
immediately find where that warning was. IIRC, if we'd split to order-0,
page[1] would have indicated that it had a memcg set, and something
bailed out.
Maybe Zi Yan recalls where that check fired.
In any case, if that warning no longer fires this is a very nice cleanup!
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] mm: Separate folio_split_memcg_refs() from split_page_memcg()
2025-03-14 21:49 ` David Hildenbrand
@ 2025-03-14 23:15 ` Zi Yan
2025-03-15 23:02 ` David Hildenbrand
0 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Zi Yan @ 2025-03-14 23:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Hildenbrand
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
Andrew Morton, linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko,
Roman Gushchin, Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song
On 14 Mar 2025, at 17:49, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 14.03.25 14:36, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
>> Folios always use memcg_data to refer to the mem_cgroup while pages
>> allocated with GFP_ACCOUNT have a pointer to the obj_cgroup. Since the
>> caller already knows what it has, split the function into two and then
>> we don't need to check.
>>
>> Move the assignment of split folio memcg_data to the point where we set
>> up the other parts of the new folio. That leaves folio_split_memcg_refs()
>> just handling the memcg accounting.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
>> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
>> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
>> Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 7 +++++++
>> mm/huge_memory.c | 16 ++++------------
>> mm/memcontrol.c | 17 +++++++++++++----
>> 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>> index 57664e2a8fb7..d090089c5497 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>> @@ -1039,6 +1039,8 @@ static inline void memcg_memory_event_mm(struct mm_struct *mm,
>> }
>> void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_order);
>> +void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio, unsigned old_order,
>> + unsigned new_order);
>> static inline u64 cgroup_id_from_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
>> {
>> @@ -1463,6 +1465,11 @@ static inline void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_or
>> {
>> }
>> +static inline void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio,
>> + unsigned old_order, unsigned new_order)
>> +{
>> +}
>> +
>> static inline u64 cgroup_id_from_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
>> {
>> return 0;
>> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
>> index 14b1963898a7..3e5ecc8f3d13 100644
>> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
>> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
>> @@ -3394,6 +3394,9 @@ static void __split_folio_to_order(struct folio *folio, int old_order,
>> folio_set_young(new_folio);
>> if (folio_test_idle(folio))
>> folio_set_idle(new_folio);
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
>> + new_folio->memcg_data = folio->memcg_data;
>> +#endif
>> folio_xchg_last_cpupid(new_folio, folio_last_cpupid(folio));
>> }
>> @@ -3525,18 +3528,7 @@ static int __split_unmapped_folio(struct folio *folio, int new_order,
>> }
>> }
>> - /*
>> - * Reset any memcg data overlay in the tail pages.
>> - * folio_nr_pages() is unreliable until prep_compound_page()
>> - * was called again.
>> - */
>> -#ifdef NR_PAGES_IN_LARGE_FOLIO
>> - folio->_nr_pages = 0;
>> -#endif
>
>
> I remember that we could trigger a warning without that, but I don't immediately find where that warning was. IIRC, if we'd split to order-0, page[1] would have indicated that it had a memcg set, and something bailed out.
>
> Maybe Zi Yan recalls where that check fired.
The error I encountered is different. When I rebase my folio_split()
on top of David’s mapcount patchset, my original patch used folio_nr_pages()
after memcg split. Since memcg overlays with _nr_pages, when splitting
to order-0, folio->_nr_page is overwritten with memcg_data, causing
folio_nr_pages() to return a bogus value. With Matthew’s this patch,
memcg_data of page[1] is written inside __split_folio_to_order(),
so in theory __split_folio_to_order() can call folio_nr_pages() like
my original patch.
For folio->_nr_pages = 0, I suppose it is trying to suppress any
page[1]->memcg_data != NULL check in the following code. But I could
not find any.
>
> In any case, if that warning no longer fires this is a very nice cleanup!
Yeah, if we see any warning on memcg later, we know how to fix it. :)
Best Regards,
Yan, Zi
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] mm: Separate folio_split_memcg_refs() from split_page_memcg()
2025-03-14 23:15 ` Zi Yan
@ 2025-03-15 23:02 ` David Hildenbrand
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand @ 2025-03-15 23:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Zi Yan
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
Andrew Morton, linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko,
Roman Gushchin, Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song
On 15.03.25 00:15, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 14 Mar 2025, at 17:49, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>
>> On 14.03.25 14:36, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
>>> Folios always use memcg_data to refer to the mem_cgroup while pages
>>> allocated with GFP_ACCOUNT have a pointer to the obj_cgroup. Since the
>>> caller already knows what it has, split the function into two and then
>>> we don't need to check.
>>>
>>> Move the assignment of split folio memcg_data to the point where we set
>>> up the other parts of the new folio. That leaves folio_split_memcg_refs()
>>> just handling the memcg accounting.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
>>> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
>>> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
>>> Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
>>> ---
>>> include/linux/memcontrol.h | 7 +++++++
>>> mm/huge_memory.c | 16 ++++------------
>>> mm/memcontrol.c | 17 +++++++++++++----
>>> 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>>> index 57664e2a8fb7..d090089c5497 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
>>> @@ -1039,6 +1039,8 @@ static inline void memcg_memory_event_mm(struct mm_struct *mm,
>>> }
>>> void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_order);
>>> +void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio, unsigned old_order,
>>> + unsigned new_order);
>>> static inline u64 cgroup_id_from_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
>>> {
>>> @@ -1463,6 +1465,11 @@ static inline void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_or
>>> {
>>> }
>>> +static inline void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio,
>>> + unsigned old_order, unsigned new_order)
>>> +{
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> static inline u64 cgroup_id_from_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
>>> {
>>> return 0;
>>> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>> index 14b1963898a7..3e5ecc8f3d13 100644
>>> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
>>> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
>>> @@ -3394,6 +3394,9 @@ static void __split_folio_to_order(struct folio *folio, int old_order,
>>> folio_set_young(new_folio);
>>> if (folio_test_idle(folio))
>>> folio_set_idle(new_folio);
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_MEMCG
>>> + new_folio->memcg_data = folio->memcg_data;
>>> +#endif
>>> folio_xchg_last_cpupid(new_folio, folio_last_cpupid(folio));
>>> }
>>> @@ -3525,18 +3528,7 @@ static int __split_unmapped_folio(struct folio *folio, int new_order,
>>> }
>>> }
>>> - /*
>>> - * Reset any memcg data overlay in the tail pages.
>>> - * folio_nr_pages() is unreliable until prep_compound_page()
>>> - * was called again.
>>> - */
>>> -#ifdef NR_PAGES_IN_LARGE_FOLIO
>>> - folio->_nr_pages = 0;
>>> -#endif
>>
>>
>> I remember that we could trigger a warning without that, but I don't immediately find where that warning was. IIRC, if we'd split to order-0, page[1] would have indicated that it had a memcg set, and something bailed out.
>>
>> Maybe Zi Yan recalls where that check fired.
>
> The error I encountered is different. When I rebase my folio_split()
> on top of David’s mapcount patchset, my original patch used folio_nr_pages()
> after memcg split. Since memcg overlays with _nr_pages, when splitting
> to order-0, folio->_nr_page is overwritten with memcg_data, causing
> folio_nr_pages() to return a bogus value. With Matthew’s this patch,
> memcg_data of page[1] is written inside __split_folio_to_order(),
> so in theory __split_folio_to_order() can call folio_nr_pages() like
> my original patch.
Ah, my memory comes back. Right, I fixed that by passing "old_order"
instead when rebasing on your series and ...
>
> For folio->_nr_pages = 0, I suppose it is trying to suppress any
> page[1]->memcg_data != NULL check in the following code. But I could
> not find any.
... that was likely an issue I ran into before rebasing on your code,
where I had to effectively clear page[1]->memcg_data.
So all good, clearing folio->_nr_pages can be dropped.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] mm: Separate folio_split_memcg_refs() from split_page_memcg()
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] mm: Separate folio_split_memcg_refs() from split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-14 21:49 ` David Hildenbrand
@ 2025-03-18 3:14 ` Roman Gushchin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Roman Gushchin @ 2025-03-18 3:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan, David Hildenbrand
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 01:36:11PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Folios always use memcg_data to refer to the mem_cgroup while pages
> allocated with GFP_ACCOUNT have a pointer to the obj_cgroup. Since the
> caller already knows what it has, split the function into two and then
> we don't need to check.
>
> Move the assignment of split folio memcg_data to the point where we set
> up the other parts of the new folio. That leaves folio_split_memcg_refs()
> just handling the memcg accounting.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: Simplify split_page_memcg()
2025-03-14 13:36 [PATCH v2 0/5] Minor memcg cleanups & prep for memdescs Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] mm: Separate folio_split_memcg_refs() from split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-14 13:36 ` Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-18 3:17 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] mm: Remove references to folio in split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
` (3 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) @ 2025-03-14 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan, David Hildenbrand
The last argument to split_page_memcg() is now always 0, so remove it,
effectively reverting commit b8791381d7ed.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
---
include/linux/memcontrol.h | 4 ++--
mm/memcontrol.c | 15 +++++++--------
mm/page_alloc.c | 4 ++--
3 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
index d090089c5497..ea28cacfb0d2 100644
--- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
+++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
@@ -1038,7 +1038,7 @@ static inline void memcg_memory_event_mm(struct mm_struct *mm,
rcu_read_unlock();
}
-void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_order);
+void split_page_memcg(struct page *first, unsigned order);
void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio, unsigned old_order,
unsigned new_order);
@@ -1461,7 +1461,7 @@ void count_memcg_event_mm(struct mm_struct *mm, enum vm_event_item idx)
{
}
-static inline void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_order)
+static inline void split_page_memcg(struct page *first, unsigned order)
{
}
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 4674d9815a50..862bb0d5c0f2 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -3086,22 +3086,21 @@ void __memcg_slab_free_hook(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab,
}
/*
- * Because folio_memcg(head) is not set on tails, set it now.
+ * The objcg is only set on the first page, so transfer it to all the
+ * other pages.
*/
-void split_page_memcg(struct page *head, int old_order, int new_order)
+void split_page_memcg(struct page *first, unsigned order)
{
- struct folio *folio = page_folio(head);
- int i;
- unsigned int old_nr = 1 << old_order;
- unsigned int new_nr = 1 << new_order;
+ struct folio *folio = page_folio(first);
+ unsigned int i, nr = 1 << order;
if (mem_cgroup_disabled() || !folio_memcg_charged(folio))
return;
- for (i = new_nr; i < old_nr; i += new_nr)
+ for (i = 1; i < nr; i++)
folio_page(folio, i)->memcg_data = folio->memcg_data;
- obj_cgroup_get_many(__folio_objcg(folio), old_nr / new_nr - 1);
+ obj_cgroup_get_many(__folio_objcg(folio), nr - 1);
}
void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio, unsigned old_order,
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index 004c4856e71a..987e14d87932 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -2813,7 +2813,7 @@ void split_page(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
set_page_refcounted(page + i);
split_page_owner(page, order, 0);
pgalloc_tag_split(page_folio(page), order, 0);
- split_page_memcg(page, order, 0);
+ split_page_memcg(page, order);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(split_page);
@@ -5033,7 +5033,7 @@ static void *make_alloc_exact(unsigned long addr, unsigned int order,
split_page_owner(page, order, 0);
pgalloc_tag_split(page_folio(page), order, 0);
- split_page_memcg(page, order, 0);
+ split_page_memcg(page, order);
while (page < --last)
set_page_refcounted(last);
--
2.47.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: Simplify split_page_memcg()
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: Simplify split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-18 3:17 ` Roman Gushchin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Roman Gushchin @ 2025-03-18 3:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan, David Hildenbrand
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 01:36:12PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> The last argument to split_page_memcg() is now always 0, so remove it,
> effectively reverting commit b8791381d7ed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> Acked-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 3/5] mm: Remove references to folio in split_page_memcg()
2025-03-14 13:36 [PATCH v2 0/5] Minor memcg cleanups & prep for memdescs Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] mm: Separate folio_split_memcg_refs() from split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: Simplify split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-14 13:36 ` Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-14 21:53 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-03-18 3:19 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] mm: Simplify folio_memcg_charged() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
` (2 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 2 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) @ 2025-03-14 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan, David Hildenbrand
We know that the passed in page is not part of a folio (it's a plain
page allocated with GFP_ACCOUNT), so we should get rid of the misleading
references to folios.
Introduce page_objcg() and page_set_objcg() helpers to make things more
clear.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 862bb0d5c0f2..9e9027dda78c 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -2697,6 +2697,23 @@ static int obj_cgroup_charge_pages(struct obj_cgroup *objcg, gfp_t gfp,
return ret;
}
+static struct obj_cgroup *page_objcg(const struct page *page)
+{
+ unsigned long memcg_data = page->memcg_data;
+
+ if (mem_cgroup_disabled() || !memcg_data)
+ return NULL;
+
+ VM_BUG_ON_PAGE((memcg_data & OBJEXTS_FLAGS_MASK) != MEMCG_DATA_KMEM,
+ page);
+ return (struct obj_cgroup *)(memcg_data - MEMCG_DATA_KMEM);
+}
+
+static void page_set_objcg(struct page *page, const struct obj_cgroup *objcg)
+{
+ page->memcg_data = (unsigned long)objcg | MEMCG_DATA_KMEM;
+}
+
/**
* __memcg_kmem_charge_page: charge a kmem page to the current memory cgroup
* @page: page to charge
@@ -2715,8 +2732,7 @@ int __memcg_kmem_charge_page(struct page *page, gfp_t gfp, int order)
ret = obj_cgroup_charge_pages(objcg, gfp, 1 << order);
if (!ret) {
obj_cgroup_get(objcg);
- page->memcg_data = (unsigned long)objcg |
- MEMCG_DATA_KMEM;
+ page_set_objcg(page, objcg);
return 0;
}
}
@@ -3089,18 +3105,18 @@ void __memcg_slab_free_hook(struct kmem_cache *s, struct slab *slab,
* The objcg is only set on the first page, so transfer it to all the
* other pages.
*/
-void split_page_memcg(struct page *first, unsigned order)
+void split_page_memcg(struct page *page, unsigned order)
{
- struct folio *folio = page_folio(first);
+ struct obj_cgroup *objcg = page_objcg(page);
unsigned int i, nr = 1 << order;
- if (mem_cgroup_disabled() || !folio_memcg_charged(folio))
+ if (!objcg)
return;
for (i = 1; i < nr; i++)
- folio_page(folio, i)->memcg_data = folio->memcg_data;
+ page_set_objcg(&page[i], objcg);
- obj_cgroup_get_many(__folio_objcg(folio), nr - 1);
+ obj_cgroup_get_many(objcg, nr - 1);
}
void folio_split_memcg_refs(struct folio *folio, unsigned old_order,
--
2.47.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] mm: Remove references to folio in split_page_memcg()
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] mm: Remove references to folio in split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-14 21:53 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-03-18 3:19 ` Roman Gushchin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand @ 2025-03-14 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle), Andrew Morton
Cc: linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan
On 14.03.25 14:36, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> We know that the passed in page is not part of a folio
It would be great if we would have a way to assert that. ... but I'm
afraid that has to wait for the memdesc split.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] mm: Remove references to folio in split_page_memcg()
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] mm: Remove references to folio in split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-14 21:53 ` David Hildenbrand
@ 2025-03-18 3:19 ` Roman Gushchin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Roman Gushchin @ 2025-03-18 3:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan, David Hildenbrand
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 01:36:13PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> We know that the passed in page is not part of a folio (it's a plain
> page allocated with GFP_ACCOUNT), so we should get rid of the misleading
> references to folios.
>
> Introduce page_objcg() and page_set_objcg() helpers to make things more
> clear.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 4/5] mm: Simplify folio_memcg_charged()
2025-03-14 13:36 [PATCH v2 0/5] Minor memcg cleanups & prep for memdescs Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] mm: Remove references to folio in split_page_memcg() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-14 13:36 ` Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-18 3:22 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] mm: Remove references to folio in __memcg_kmem_uncharge_page() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-14 21:53 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] Minor memcg cleanups & prep for memdescs David Hildenbrand
5 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) @ 2025-03-14 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan, David Hildenbrand
There's no need to check which kind of pointer is in the memcg_data
field, all we actually care about is whether it's zero or not.
Saves 70 bytes in workingset_activation() with the Debian config.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
---
include/linux/memcontrol.h | 4 +---
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/memcontrol.h b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
index ea28cacfb0d2..53364526d877 100644
--- a/include/linux/memcontrol.h
+++ b/include/linux/memcontrol.h
@@ -438,9 +438,7 @@ static inline struct mem_cgroup *folio_memcg(struct folio *folio)
*/
static inline bool folio_memcg_charged(struct folio *folio)
{
- if (folio_memcg_kmem(folio))
- return __folio_objcg(folio) != NULL;
- return __folio_memcg(folio) != NULL;
+ return folio->memcg_data != 0;
}
/*
--
2.47.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 4/5] mm: Simplify folio_memcg_charged()
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] mm: Simplify folio_memcg_charged() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-18 3:22 ` Roman Gushchin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Roman Gushchin @ 2025-03-18 3:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan, David Hildenbrand
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 01:36:14PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> There's no need to check which kind of pointer is in the memcg_data
> field, all we actually care about is whether it's zero or not.
> Saves 70 bytes in workingset_activation() with the Debian config.
:)
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2 5/5] mm: Remove references to folio in __memcg_kmem_uncharge_page()
2025-03-14 13:36 [PATCH v2 0/5] Minor memcg cleanups & prep for memdescs Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] mm: Simplify folio_memcg_charged() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-14 13:36 ` Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
2025-03-18 3:24 ` Roman Gushchin
2025-03-14 21:53 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] Minor memcg cleanups & prep for memdescs David Hildenbrand
5 siblings, 1 reply; 16+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) @ 2025-03-14 13:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle),
linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan, David Hildenbrand
This use of folios is misleading because these pages are not part of
a folio. Remove an unnecessary call to page_folio(), saving 58 bytes
of text in a Debian kernel build.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
---
mm/memcontrol.c | 8 +++-----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index 9e9027dda78c..76ba1953173a 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -2746,16 +2746,14 @@ int __memcg_kmem_charge_page(struct page *page, gfp_t gfp, int order)
*/
void __memcg_kmem_uncharge_page(struct page *page, int order)
{
- struct folio *folio = page_folio(page);
- struct obj_cgroup *objcg;
+ struct obj_cgroup *objcg = page_objcg(page);
unsigned int nr_pages = 1 << order;
- if (!folio_memcg_kmem(folio))
+ if (!objcg)
return;
- objcg = __folio_objcg(folio);
obj_cgroup_uncharge_pages(objcg, nr_pages);
- folio->memcg_data = 0;
+ page->memcg_data = 0;
obj_cgroup_put(objcg);
}
--
2.47.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] mm: Remove references to folio in __memcg_kmem_uncharge_page()
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] mm: Remove references to folio in __memcg_kmem_uncharge_page() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-18 3:24 ` Roman Gushchin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: Roman Gushchin @ 2025-03-18 3:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan, David Hildenbrand
On Fri, Mar 14, 2025 at 01:36:15PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> This use of folios is misleading because these pages are not part of
> a folio. Remove an unnecessary call to page_folio(), saving 58 bytes
> of text in a Debian kernel build.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) <willy@infradead.org>
> Acked-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
Thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Minor memcg cleanups & prep for memdescs
2025-03-14 13:36 [PATCH v2 0/5] Minor memcg cleanups & prep for memdescs Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2025-03-14 13:36 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] mm: Remove references to folio in __memcg_kmem_uncharge_page() Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
@ 2025-03-14 21:53 ` David Hildenbrand
5 siblings, 0 replies; 16+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand @ 2025-03-14 21:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle), Andrew Morton
Cc: linux-mm, Johannes Weiner, Michal Hocko, Roman Gushchin,
Shakeel Butt, Muchun Song, Zi Yan
On 14.03.25 14:36, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle) wrote:
> Separate the handling of accounted folios and GFP_ACCOUNT pages for easier
> to understand code. For more detail, see
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/Z9LwTOudOlCGny3f@casper.infradead.org/
Nothing jumped at me, looking good.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 16+ messages in thread