linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
To: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@kernel.org,
	lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.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,
	linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v3 2/2] mm/huge_memory: merge uniform_split_supported() and non_uniform_split_supported()
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 01:17:21 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251107011721.ez6pile62o3vmjz3@master> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0D94CF57-A9C9-4C01-A9E5-CE47AE3F10EB@nvidia.com>

On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 07:46:14PM -0500, Zi Yan wrote:
>On 5 Nov 2025, at 22:41, Wei Yang wrote:
>
>> 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(-)
>>
>LGTM. Thanks. Reviewed-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>

Hi, Zi

I am thinking whether it is proper to move the check (new_order < min_order)
from __folio_split() to folio_split_supported(). So that we could bail out
early if file system couldn't split to new_order.

Not sure you like it or not.

-- 
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me


  reply	other threads:[~2025-11-07  1:17 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 ` [Patch v3 2/2] mm/huge_memory: merge uniform_split_supported() and non_uniform_split_supported() Wei Yang
2025-11-06 10:20   ` David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
2025-11-07  0:46   ` Zi Yan
2025-11-07  1:17     ` Wei Yang [this message]
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=20251107011721.ez6pile62o3vmjz3@master \
    --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