From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66E16CAC5A5 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 01:43:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id A21958E000F; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 21:43:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 9F9398E0001; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 21:43:47 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 936628E000F; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 21:43:47 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 869B68E0001 for ; Wed, 24 Sep 2025 21:43:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin26.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 294EBB6E9F for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 01:43:47 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 83926076094.26.C11E2E7 Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.189]) by imf11.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B796740003 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 01:43:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf11.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (imf11.hostedemail.com: domain of yintirui@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.189 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=yintirui@huawei.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1758764625; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Ynf+6JVe8qx70BIJa2YsOoJZFjYIQqVWH6WDtkKuWb0=; b=fDNyJdrC0mC5vD1E779Y8AulIwxzKikb4PWILljOJYLJg6GHDQsEX+gcz1ObUH9tq9e7rT suu1usPbSEcTaPIvlN0l6pENIQwuEfyJKOQqUYFJ/9/KJxUKKh4VTV2wb9wmXdxX1aIqiy +8Ap+BDfiNjC96ud0jPjhaK9+YneDfc= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf11.hostedemail.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (imf11.hostedemail.com: domain of yintirui@huawei.com designates 45.249.212.189 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=yintirui@huawei.com; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=huawei.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1758764625; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=xY1qlURQAEtXfxwY3zMdMPNZ/ysAOPo+iMITlkHVAN+lrFCaSDmY8V8Z0qhSwCQnlReDYm jNldjp1s8WhKKiYOe/8ARD4MAdeYwwtoYTN9tevl5HLNH0MnjaZWIFv0vzYjWTVU265V/7 h6Ag8EN4JDqOBtQYcXrI1p16jlJJB+Y= Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.88.105]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4cXGb80jBLzddVk; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 09:39:00 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemr500001.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.202.194.229]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D3111401E9; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 09:43:39 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.179.35] (10.174.179.35) by kwepemr500001.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Thu, 25 Sep 2025 09:43:37 +0800 Message-ID: <8313b0c1-bf62-4257-951c-fd7e29193ae2@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2025 09:43:37 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] mm: add PMD-level huge page support for remap_pfn_range() To: David Hildenbrand , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , CC: , References: <20250923133104.926672-1-yintirui@huawei.com> <20250923133104.926672-3-yintirui@huawei.com> From: Yin Tirui In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.174.179.35] X-ClientProxiedBy: kwepems500002.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.17) To kwepemr500001.china.huawei.com (7.202.194.229) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: B796740003 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Stat-Signature: 543pmtqyw51nb3zorhuk5esokka4gmwk X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1758764624-918733 X-HE-Meta: U2FsdGVkX19iarsCnyXDjMObWaozehyR2fdVYkEXoiaAyoWvhNU9/cz4gTSRGk33vURZw9SHACRDT0uHPTcLuKktbYmlF/Yb80u6RNXoxny+Wr7AvZqNOp8q/Buo0ojEBqKEdL3D2bAFSU4ELwd4NfbxRGQIHk8+cL7tHnJVoBvPIG3Fof7Xy/nU/CRiu6Icm17+u/U+SlB+g1csiMkOrIls/hEXgsgl4D3Anm/W5RVXssdy1ZiqQzVdvbJXLNNKSPcicoN5HXnZRyENugX10Q/rBqrtUkMDXLHdO5Ugb6UdrwmdY2iHEzlKznMr5atwADw7C5zx26MfDIWn+nTgGzTA5i0FumTu1qoqJW2o9FTOPa30joqDVDXy01AicZM3j7lMPdiurzhYHP7ZsGJPXrBJqmvLQRTHZt4z07JLDpYNQnrTTpuiAGglvD4N7Gus3IP5E6MsoQkX2b9l/YrVAKuUXNEtBMhYlBdl3d4uVzhJxOd+6G3FsQ22xvGFeyXw+KY5mwMs/6VDE+78TgKkLa2uGHbWJEy69QH/1dFktfde7V72UiBYLZghSNaoZDKOjv6Qhjw9Lbc5cRH6s3fmWXG5KhrbtI5kj9UxSrINFP8znfDh9i3EC+/OVFR7vtcnnHtAbLpUFtTSDNNEu4OrSmhzqfSFgGGTVQU9TQqlrYMJ7BUILLdhiYdkBJe5EFy7mkJO1MfzxfGkNPlQrkSCjut9It227tSHGCto4i0s7KtO3UfjJ+8G1+RI1wYAdVJij+bVnTS3G9BKPmVHIF4ggP0DL6oR4szbbdaVliR5Dl/xH/Hrrg6UeH0t1BY+//d6bCmd2fMSlfqFuL/BgzOyrKyLadKokYYb2HP64tiPUAuM7NUlhPhwNARsFFGsV+MUp2Gn4GOqBuyHY3h3+JvVs3s6iFVpA1PLemww9yk/Sld00TXSUrDccmxoDGEkSgTSlJZ9KGSln0VGeJRz4lr lOaUW67B BocPNloidSh9wjEt9/KYqLC4m5yX1AjkN0epLnG8ltS7yFyUQTM6YF2xTjzGbyvXY+wv3uAzgQdkLDPBb59csgMfLXSs+WuU5JzaUPTKosJKJORdptD+PBiDLjh9E20eC/rmP8soEOBks+0NuN6k8mNzJ0d9WObp6BguIk0UexAE1V/Zpb9YlAk9sN5+lCduleo2Nlxu5FBq5EZ9qaa5vSEMamdKvbq7WeSDNwyzkJE7PM/p+2+aME998aHschtUeCf/Vq7K0a1Sz9eI= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 9/24/2025 5:50 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> Introduce pfnmap_max_page_shift parameter to control maximum page >> size and "nohugepfnmap" boot option to disable huge pfnmap entirely. > > Why? If an arch supports it we should just do it. Or what's the reason > behind that? > There's no specific reason for this - it was just intended to provide an additional option. I'll remove it in the next version. ... > Are you sure we can just entirely remove this block for ! > vma_is_anonymous(vma)? > Thank you for pointing this out! There is definitely a problem with removing this block entirely for non-anonymous VMAs. I've also found some other problems. I'll fix all of them in the next version. -- Best regards, Yin Tirui