On Fri, 2026-04-03 at 15:40 -0400, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> 
> @@ -755,6 +752,9 @@ struct per_cpu_pages {
>  #endif
>   short free_count; /* consecutive free count */
>  
> + /* Pageblocks owned by this CPU, for fragment recovery */
> + struct list_head owned_blocks;
> +
>   /* Lists of pages, one per migrate type stored on the pcp-lists */
>   struct list_head lists[NR_PCP_LISTS];
>  } ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
> 

> + /*
> + * Phase 0: Recover fragments from owned blocks.
> + *
> + * The owned_blocks list tracks blocks that have fragments
> + * sitting in zone buddy (put there by drains). Pull matching
> + * fragments back to PCP with PagePCPBuddy so they participate
> + * in merging, instead of claiming fresh blocks and spreading
> + * fragmentation further.
> + *
> + * Only recover blocks matching the requested migratetype.
> + * After recovery, remove the block from the list -- the drain
> + * path re-adds it if new fragments arrive.
> + */
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(pbd, tmp, &pcp->owned_blocks, cpu_node) {
> + unsigned long base_pfn, pfn;
> + int block_mt;
> +
> + base_pfn = pbd->block_pfn;
> + block_mt = pbd_migratetype(pbd);
> + if (block_mt != migratetype)
> + continue;

GIven that you just skip over blocks of the wrong migratetype,
I wonder if it makes sense to have a different list head for each
migratetype in the per_cpu_pages struct.

Not that I should be saying anything that would slow down
the merging of these patches, since making the buddy allocator
more of a slow path is pretty much a prerequisite for the 1GB
allocation stuff I'm working on :)


-- 
All Rights Reversed.