From: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org, hughd@google.com
Cc: willy@infradead.org, ziy@nvidia.com, david@kernel.org,
ljs@kernel.org, lance.yang@linux.dev, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com,
baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] Revert "tmpfs: don't enable large folios if not supported"
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 09:41:42 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b2c7deee259a94b0d00a7c320d8d24d2c421f761.1776908112.git.baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
This reverts commit 5a90c155defa684f3a21f68c3f8e40c056e6114c.
Currently, when shmem mounts are initialized, they only use 'sbinfo->huge' to
determine whether the shmem mount supports large folios. However, for anonymous
shmem, whether it supports large folios can be dynamically configured via sysfs
interfaces, so setting or not setting mapping_set_large_folios() during initialization
cannot accurately reflect whether anonymous shmem actually supports large folios,
which has already caused some confusion[1].
Moreover, for tmpfs mounts, relying on 'sbinfo->huge' cannot keep the mapping_set_large_folios()
setting consistent across all mappings in the entire tmpfs mount. In other words,
under the same tmpfs mount, after remount, we might end up with some mappings
supporting large folios (calling mapping_set_large_folios()) while others don't.
After some investigation, I found that the write performance regression addressed
by commit 5a90c155defa has already been fixed by the following commit 665575cff098b
("filemap: move prefaulting out of hot write path"). See the following test data:
Base:
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=400K count=10485 (3.2 GB/s)
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=800K count=5242 (3.2 GB/s)
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=1600K count=2621 (3.1 GB/s)
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=2200K count=1906 (3.0 GB/s )
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=3000K count=1398 (3.0 GB/s)
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=4500K count=932 (3.1 GB/s)
Base + revert 5a90c155defa:
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=400K count=10485 (3.3 GB/s)
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=800K count=5242 (3.3 GB/s)
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=1600K count=2621 (3.2 GB/s)
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=2200K count=1906 (3.1 GB/s)
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/testbs=3000K count=1398 (3.0 GB/s)
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/tmpfs/test bs=4500K count=932 (3.1 GB/s)
The data is basically consistent with minor fluctuation noise. So we can now
safely revert commit 5a90c155defa to set mapping_set_large_folios() for all
shmem mounts unconditionally.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/ec927492-4577-4192-8fad-85eb1bb43121@linux.alibaba.com/
Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
---
Note: for more investigation and test data, see:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/116df9f9-4db7-40d4-a4a4-30a87c0feffa@linux.alibaba.com/
Thanks Kefeng for confirming the performance issue.
---
mm/shmem.c | 5 +----
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/shmem.c b/mm/shmem.c
index 4ecefe02881d..dafbea53b22d 100644
--- a/mm/shmem.c
+++ b/mm/shmem.c
@@ -3087,10 +3087,7 @@ static struct inode *__shmem_get_inode(struct mnt_idmap *idmap,
cache_no_acl(inode);
if (sbinfo->noswap)
mapping_set_unevictable(inode->i_mapping);
-
- /* Don't consider 'deny' for emergencies and 'force' for testing */
- if (sbinfo->huge)
- mapping_set_large_folios(inode->i_mapping);
+ mapping_set_large_folios(inode->i_mapping);
switch (mode & S_IFMT) {
default:
--
2.47.3
next reply other threads:[~2026-04-23 1:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-23 1:41 Baolin Wang [this message]
2026-04-23 2:37 ` Zi Yan
2026-04-23 2:46 ` Kefeng Wang
2026-04-23 2:57 ` Lance Yang
2026-04-23 13:20 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
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=b2c7deee259a94b0d00a7c320d8d24d2c421f761.1776908112.git.baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--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