Re: [PATCH 5/9] mm/rmap: batch unmap folios belonging to uffd-wp VMAs

[Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>]

On 11/03/26 9:44 am, Barry Song wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 7:32 AM Barry Song <21cnbao@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 4:34 PM Lorenzo Stoakes (Oracle) <ljs@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2026 at 01:00:09PM +0530, Dev Jain wrote:
>>>> The ptes are all the same w.r.t belonging to the same type of VMA, and
>>>> being marked with uffd-wp or all being not marked. Therefore we can batch
>>>> set uffd-wp markers through install_uffd_wp_ptes_if_needed, and enable
>>>> batched unmapping of folios belonging to uffd-wp VMAs by dropping that
>>>> condition from folio_unmap_pte_batch.
>>>>
>>>> It may happen that we don't batch over the entire folio in one go, in which
>>>> case, we must skip over the current batch. Add a helper to do that -
>>>> page_vma_mapped_walk_jump() will increment the relevant fields of pvmw
>>>> by nr pages.
>>>>
>>>> I think that we can get away with just incrementing pvmw->pte
>>>> and pvmw->address, since looking at the code in page_vma_mapped.c,
>>>> pvmw->pfn and pvmw->nr_pages are used in conjunction, and pvmw->pgoff
>>>> and pvmw->nr_pages (in vma_address_end()) are used in conjunction,
>>>> cancelling out the increment and decrement in the respective fields. But
>>>> let us not rely on the pvmw implementation and keep this simple.
>>>
>>> This isn't simple...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Export this function to rmap.h to enable future reuse.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  include/linux/rmap.h | 10 ++++++++++
>>>>  mm/rmap.c            |  8 +++-----
>>>>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/rmap.h b/include/linux/rmap.h
>>>> index 8dc0871e5f001..1b7720c66ac87 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/rmap.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/rmap.h
>>>> @@ -892,6 +892,16 @@ static inline void page_vma_mapped_walk_done(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw)
>>>>               spin_unlock(pvmw->ptl);
>>>>  }
>>>>
>>>> +static inline void page_vma_mapped_walk_jump(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw,
>>>> +             unsigned int nr)
>>>
>>> unsigned long nr_pages... 'nr' is meaningless and you're mixing + matching types
>>> for no reason.
>>>
>>>> +{
>>>> +     pvmw->pfn += nr;
>>>> +     pvmw->nr_pages -= nr;
>>>> +     pvmw->pgoff += nr;
>>>> +     pvmw->pte += nr;
>>>> +     pvmw->address += nr * PAGE_SIZE;
>>>> +}
>>>
>>> I absolutely hate this. It's extremely confusing, especially since you're now
>>> going from looking at 1 page to nr_pages - 1, jump doesn't really mean anything
>>> here, you're losing sight of the batch size and exposing a silly detail to the
>>> caller, and I really don't want to 'export' this at this time.
>>
>> I’m fairly sure I raised the same concern when Dev first suggested this,
>> but somehow it seems my comment was completely overlooked. :-)

I do recall, perhaps I was lazy to look at the pvmw code :) But I should
have just looked at this earlier, it's fairly simple. See below.

>>
>>>
>>> If we must have this, can you please make it static in rmap.c at least for the
>>> time being.
>>>
>>> Or perhaps instead, have a batched variant of page_vma_mapped_walk(), like
>>> page_vma_mapped_walk_batch()?
>>
>> Right now, for non-anon pages we face the same issues, but
>> page_vma_mapped_walk() can skip those PTEs once it finds that
>> nr - 1 PTEs are none.
>>
>> next_pte:
>>                 do {
>>                         pvmw->address += PAGE_SIZE;
>>                         if (pvmw->address >= end)
>>                                 return not_found(pvmw);
>>                         /* Did we cross page table boundary? */
>>                         if ((pvmw->address & (PMD_SIZE - PAGE_SIZE)) == 0) {
>>                                 if (pvmw->ptl) {
>>                                         spin_unlock(pvmw->ptl);
>>                                         pvmw->ptl = NULL;
>>                                 }
>>                                 pte_unmap(pvmw->pte);
>>                                 pvmw->pte = NULL;
>>                                 pvmw->flags |= PVMW_PGTABLE_CROSSED;
>>                                 goto restart;
>>                         }
>>                         pvmw->pte++;
>>                 } while (pte_none(ptep_get(pvmw->pte)));
>>
>> The difference now is that swap entries cannot be skipped.
>>
>> If we're trying to find `page_vma_mapped_walk_batch()`, I suppose
>> it could be like this?
>>
>> bool page_vma_mapped_walk_batch(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw,
>> unsigned long nr)
>> {
>> ...
>> }
>>
>> static inline bool page_vma_mapped_walk(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw)
>> {
>>         return page_vma_mapped_walk_batch(pvmw, 1);
>> }
> 
> Another approach might be to introduce a flag so that
> page_vma_mapped_walk() knows we are doing batched unmaps
> and can skip nr - 1 swap entries.
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/rmap.h b/include/linux/rmap.h
> index 8dc0871e5f00..bf03ae006366 100644
> --- a/include/linux/rmap.h
> +++ b/include/linux/rmap.h
> @@ -856,6 +856,9 @@ struct page *make_device_exclusive(struct
> mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
>  /* Look for migration entries rather than present PTEs */
>  #define PVMW_MIGRATION         (1 << 1)
> 
> +/* Batched unmap: skip swap entries. */
> +#define PVMW_BATCH_UNMAP       (1 << 2)

Exactly, I just also came up with the same solution and saw your reply :)
We can just name this PVMW_BATCH_PRESENT, the comment saying
"Look for present entries", and fix the comment above PVMW_MIGRATION to
drop the "rather than present PTEs" because that is wrong, we are currently
also looking for softleaf entries by default.

> +
>  /* Result flags */
> 
>  /* The page is mapped across page table boundary */
> 
> 
> Thanks
> Barry