linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
	Jinjiang Tu <tujinjiang@huawei.com>
Cc: fengwei.yin@intel.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] filemap: optimize order0 folio in filemap_map_pages
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 14:57:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bb6e89e1-ff86-43cf-980d-b03b644d85be@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aKcU-fzxeW3xT5Wv@casper.infradead.org>

On 21.08.25 14:45, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 21, 2025 at 09:22:48AM +0800, Jinjiang Tu wrote:
>> 在 2025/8/20 20:42, Matthew Wilcox 写道:
>>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2025 at 09:10:56AM +0800, Jinjiang Tu wrote:
>>>> We should call folio_unlock() before folio_put(). In filemap_map_order0_folio(),
>>>> if we doesn't set folio into pte, we should unlock and put folio.
>>> I agree that folio_unlock() needs to be called before folio_put().
>>> What I don't understand is why we need to delay folio_unlock() until
>>> right before folio_put().  Can't we leave folio_unlock() where it
>>> currently is and only move the folio_put()?
>>
>> In filemap_map_order0_folio(), assuming the page is hwpoisoned, we skip set_pte_range(),
>> the folio should be unlocked and put. If we only move folio_put() to filemap_map_order0_folio(),
>> the folio is unlocked when filemap_map_pages() doesn't hold any folio refcount.
> Oh, I see.  I misread your patch; sorry about that.
> 
> However, it is still safe to move only the folio_put() and not move
> the folio_unlock()!  It's a little subtle, so I'll explain.
> 
> We must not free a locked folio.  The page allocator has checks for this
> and will complain (assuming appropriate debug options are enabled).  So
> this sequence:
> 
> 	folio_put(folio);
> 	folio_unlock(folio);
> 
> is _generally_ unsafe because the folio_put() might be the last put of
> the refcount which will cause the folio to be freed.  However, if we know
> that the folio has a refcount > 1, it's safe because the folio_put()
> won't free the folio.  We do know that the folio has a refcount >1
> because it's in the page cache, which keeps a refcount on the folio.
> Since we have it locked, we know that truncation will wait for the unlock
> to happen, and truncation will be the last one to put the refcount.

I agree that it is save, but is it worth it having that subtle detail 
here instead of just doing unlock+put?

IOW, what do we gain by doing it differently? :)

-- 
Cheers

David / dhildenb


  reply	other threads:[~2025-08-21 12:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-19 14:06 Jinjiang Tu
2025-08-19 15:52 ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-08-20  1:10   ` Jinjiang Tu
2025-08-20 12:42     ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-08-21  1:22       ` Jinjiang Tu
2025-08-21 12:45         ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-08-21 12:57           ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2025-08-21 13:20             ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-08-21 13:35               ` David Hildenbrand
2025-09-02 14:04                 ` Kefeng Wang
2025-09-03  4:50                   ` Matthew Wilcox
2025-09-03  6:22                     ` Kefeng Wang
2025-08-22  2:01           ` Jinjiang Tu

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=bb6e89e1-ff86-43cf-980d-b03b644d85be@redhat.com \
    --to=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=fengwei.yin@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=tujinjiang@huawei.com \
    --cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /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