From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@kernel.org,
lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, ziy@nvidia.com,
baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com,
npache@redhat.com, ryan.roberts@arm.com, dev.jain@arm.com,
baohua@kernel.org, lance.yang@linux.dev
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
Subject: [Patch v3 2/2] mm/huge_memory: merge uniform_split_supported() and non_uniform_split_supported()
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2025 03:41:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251106034155.21398-3-richard.weiyang@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251106034155.21398-1-richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
The functions uniform_split_supported() and
non_uniform_split_supported() share significantly similar logic.
The only functional difference is that uniform_split_supported()
includes an additional check on the requested @new_order.
The reason for this check comes from the following two aspects:
* some file system or swap cache just supports order-0 folio
* the behavioral difference between uniform/non-uniform split
The behavioral difference between uniform split and non-uniform:
* uniform split splits folio directly to @new_order
* non-uniform split creates after-split folios with orders from
folio_order(folio) - 1 to new_order.
This means for non-uniform split or !new_order split we should check the
file system and swap cache respectively.
This commit unifies the logic and merge the two functions into a single
combined helper, removing redundant code and simplifying the split
support checking mechanism.
Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@kernel.org>
---
v3:
* adjust to use split_type
* rebase on Zi Yan fix lkml.kernel.org/r/20251105162910.752266-1-ziy@nvidia.com
v2:
* remove need_check
* update comment
* add more explanation in change log
---
include/linux/huge_mm.h | 8 ++---
mm/huge_memory.c | 71 +++++++++++++++++------------------------
2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/huge_mm.h b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
index 9e96dbe2f246..6f9e711b0954 100644
--- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
+++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
@@ -374,10 +374,8 @@ int __split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(struct page *page, struct list_head *list
unsigned int new_order, bool unmapped);
int min_order_for_split(struct folio *folio);
int split_folio_to_list(struct folio *folio, struct list_head *list);
-bool uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
- bool warns);
-bool non_uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
- bool warns);
+bool folio_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
+ enum split_type split_type, bool warns);
int folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order, struct page *page,
struct list_head *list);
@@ -408,7 +406,7 @@ static inline int split_huge_page_to_order(struct page *page, unsigned int new_o
static inline int try_folio_split_to_order(struct folio *folio,
struct page *page, unsigned int new_order)
{
- if (!non_uniform_split_supported(folio, new_order, /* warns= */ false))
+ if (!folio_split_supported(folio, new_order, SPLIT_TYPE_NON_UNIFORM, /* warns= */ false))
return split_huge_page_to_order(&folio->page, new_order);
return folio_split(folio, new_order, page, NULL);
}
diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index 659532199233..c676f2ab0611 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -3686,8 +3686,8 @@ static int __split_unmapped_folio(struct folio *folio, int new_order,
return 0;
}
-bool non_uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
- bool warns)
+bool folio_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
+ enum split_type split_type, bool warns)
{
if (folio_test_anon(folio)) {
/* order-1 is not supported for anonymous THP. */
@@ -3695,48 +3695,41 @@ bool non_uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
"Cannot split to order-1 folio");
if (new_order == 1)
return false;
- } else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS) &&
- !mapping_large_folio_support(folio->mapping)) {
- /*
- * No split if the file system does not support large folio.
- * Note that we might still have THPs in such mappings due to
- * CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS. But in that case, the mapping
- * does not actually support large folios properly.
- */
- VM_WARN_ONCE(warns,
- "Cannot split file folio to non-0 order");
- return false;
- }
-
- /* Only swapping a whole PMD-mapped folio is supported */
- if (folio_test_swapcache(folio)) {
- VM_WARN_ONCE(warns,
- "Cannot split swapcache folio to non-0 order");
- return false;
- }
-
- return true;
-}
-
-/* See comments in non_uniform_split_supported() */
-bool uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
- bool warns)
-{
- if (folio_test_anon(folio)) {
- VM_WARN_ONCE(warns && new_order == 1,
- "Cannot split to order-1 folio");
- if (new_order == 1)
- return false;
- } else if (new_order) {
+ } else if (split_type == SPLIT_TYPE_NON_UNIFORM || new_order) {
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS) &&
!mapping_large_folio_support(folio->mapping)) {
+ /*
+ * We can always split a folio down to a single page
+ * (new_order == 0) uniformly.
+ *
+ * For any other scenario
+ * a) uniform split targeting a large folio
+ * (new_order > 0)
+ * b) any non-uniform split
+ * we must confirm that the file system supports large
+ * folios.
+ *
+ * Note that we might still have THPs in such
+ * mappings, which is created from khugepaged when
+ * CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS is enabled. But in that
+ * case, the mapping does not actually support large
+ * folios properly.
+ */
VM_WARN_ONCE(warns,
"Cannot split file folio to non-0 order");
return false;
}
}
- if (new_order && folio_test_swapcache(folio)) {
+ /*
+ * swapcache folio could only be split to order 0
+ *
+ * non-uniform split creates after-split folios with orders from
+ * folio_order(folio) - 1 to new_order, making it not suitable for any
+ * swapcache folio split. Only uniform split to order-0 can be used
+ * here.
+ */
+ if ((split_type == SPLIT_TYPE_NON_UNIFORM || new_order) && folio_test_swapcache(folio)) {
VM_WARN_ONCE(warns,
"Cannot split swapcache folio to non-0 order");
return false;
@@ -3794,11 +3787,7 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
if (new_order >= old_order)
return -EINVAL;
- if (split_type == SPLIT_TYPE_UNIFORM && !uniform_split_supported(folio, new_order, true))
- return -EINVAL;
-
- if (split_type == SPLIT_TYPE_NON_UNIFORM &&
- !non_uniform_split_supported(folio, new_order, true))
+ if (!folio_split_supported(folio, new_order, split_type, /* warn = */ true))
return -EINVAL;
is_hzp = is_huge_zero_folio(folio);
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-06 3:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-06 3:41 [Patch v3 0/2] mm/huge_memory: Define split_type and consolidate split support checks Wei Yang
2025-11-06 3:41 ` [Patch v3 1/2] mm/huge_memory: introduce enum split_type for clarity Wei Yang
2025-11-06 10:17 ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2025-11-06 14:57 ` Wei Yang
2025-11-07 0:44 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-06 3:41 ` Wei Yang [this message]
2025-11-06 10:20 ` [Patch v3 2/2] mm/huge_memory: merge uniform_split_supported() and non_uniform_split_supported() David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2025-11-07 0:46 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-07 1:17 ` Wei Yang
2025-11-07 2:07 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-07 2:49 ` Wei Yang
2025-11-07 3:21 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-07 7:29 ` Wei Yang
2025-11-14 3:03 ` Wei Yang
2025-11-17 1:22 ` Wei Yang
2025-11-17 15:56 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-18 2:10 ` Wei Yang
2025-11-18 3:33 ` Wei Yang
2025-11-18 4:10 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-18 18:32 ` Andrew Morton
2025-11-18 18:55 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-18 22:06 ` Andrew Morton
2025-11-19 0:52 ` Wei Yang
2025-11-20 21:16 ` Andrew Morton
2025-11-21 0:55 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-21 9:00 ` Wei Yang
2025-11-21 14:59 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-21 16:50 ` Andrew Morton
2025-11-21 17:00 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-21 18:39 ` Andrew Morton
2025-11-21 19:09 ` Zi Yan
2025-11-21 19:15 ` Andrew Morton
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=20251106034155.21398-3-richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
--to=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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