From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>, Gavin Guo <gavinguo@igalia.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Subject: [PATCH 2/5] mm,hugetlb: Document the reason to lock the folio in the faulting path
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2025 15:46:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250612134701.377855-3-osalvador@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250612134701.377855-1-osalvador@suse.de>
Recent conversations showed that there was a misunderstanding about why we
were locking the folio prior to calling hugetlb_wp().
Document explicitly why we need to take the lock, explaining on the way that
although the timespan for the locking of anonymous and file folios is different,
it would require a major surgery to represent that difference with the current
code.
Signed-off-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
---
mm/hugetlb.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
index 175edafeec67..dfa09fc3b2c6 100644
--- a/mm/hugetlb.c
+++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
@@ -6537,6 +6537,10 @@ static vm_fault_t hugetlb_no_page(struct address_space *mapping,
}
new_pagecache_folio = true;
} else {
+ /*
+ * hugetlb_wp() expects the folio to be locked in order to
+ * check whether we can re-use this page exclusively for us.
+ */
folio_lock(folio);
anon_rmap = 1;
}
@@ -6801,7 +6805,19 @@ vm_fault_t hugetlb_fault(struct mm_struct *mm, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
/* Fallthrough to CoW */
}
- /* hugetlb_wp() requires page locks of pte_page(vmf.orig_pte) */
+ /*
+ * We need to lock the folio before calling hugetlb_wp().
+ * Either the folio is in the pagecache and we need to copy it over
+ * to another file, so it must remain stable throughout the operation,
+ * or the folio is anonymous and we need to lock it in order to check
+ * whether we can re-use it and mark it exclusive for this process.
+ * The timespan for the lock differs depending on the type, since
+ * anonymous folios only need to hold the lock while checking whether we
+ * can re-use it, while we need to hold it throughout the copy in case
+ * we are dealing with a folio from a pagecache.
+ * Representing this difference would be tricky with the current code,
+ * so just hold the lock for the duration of hugetlb_wp().
+ */
folio = page_folio(pte_page(vmf.orig_pte));
folio_lock(folio);
folio_get(folio);
--
2.49.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-12 13:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-12 13:46 [PATCH 0/5] Misc rework on hugetlb_fault Oscar Salvador
2025-06-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 1/5] mm,hugetlb: Change mechanism to detect a COW on private mapping Oscar Salvador
2025-06-13 13:52 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-12 13:46 ` Oscar Salvador [this message]
2025-06-13 13:56 ` [PATCH 2/5] mm,hugetlb: Document the reason to lock the folio in the faulting path David Hildenbrand
2025-06-13 14:23 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-13 19:57 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-13 21:47 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-14 9:07 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-16 9:22 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-16 14:10 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-16 14:41 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-17 10:03 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-17 11:27 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-17 12:04 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-17 12:08 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-17 12:10 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-17 12:50 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-17 13:42 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-17 14:00 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-19 11:52 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-06-12 13:46 ` [PATCH 3/5] mm,hugetlb: Conver anon_rmap into boolean Oscar Salvador
2025-06-13 13:48 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-12 13:47 ` [PATCH 4/5] mm,hugetlb: Drop obsolete comment about non-present pte and second faults Oscar Salvador
2025-06-12 13:47 ` [PATCH 5/5] mm,hugetlb: Drop unlikelys from hugetlb_fault Oscar Salvador
2025-06-13 8:55 ` [PATCH 0/5] Misc rework on hugetlb_fault Oscar Salvador
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20250612134701.377855-3-osalvador@suse.de \
--to=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=gavinguo@igalia.com \
--cc=jthoughton@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox