All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>
To: "Barry Song (Xiaomi)" <baohua@kernel.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Cc: baoquan.he@linux.dev, chrisl@kernel.org, jp.kobryn@linux.dev,
	kasong@tencent.com, liam@infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ljs@kernel.org, mhocko@suse.com,
	nphamcs@gmail.com, rppt@kernel.org, shakeel.butt@linux.dev,
	shikemeng@huaweicloud.com, surenb@google.com,
	usama.arif@linux.dev, vbabka@kernel.org, youngjun.park@lge.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] mm: drop stale folio_ref_count()==1 check in do_swap_page reuse logic
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2026 10:14:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <3a185a5d-2f2c-4e9d-9cd9-8bdb236dfc5c@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260701235955.36126-3-baohua@kernel.org>

On 7/2/26 01:59, Barry Song (Xiaomi) wrote:
> The "we just allocated them without exposing them to the swapcache"
> case no longer exists, as Kairui has routed synchronous I/O through
> the swapcache as well in his series "unify swapin use swap cache and
> cleanup flags"[1]. As a result, folio_ref_count() should never be 1
> in this path, since at least two references are held (base ref plus
> swapcache). Remove the folio_ref_count()==1 check and update the
> comment accordingly.

Sashiko points out two minor things (one flagged as medium, lol, sure sure).

Here, you can clarify that folio_ref_count()==1 is true for freshly allocated
pages (due to the KSM check) in which case exclusive=true already.

> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251220-swap-table-p2-v5-0-8862a265a033@tencent.com/
> 
> Acked-by: Usama Arif <usama.arif@linux.dev>
> Reviewed-by: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>
> Reviewed-by: Baoquan He <baoquan.he@linux.dev>
> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> Signed-off-by: Barry Song (Xiaomi) <baohua@kernel.org>
> ---
>  mm/memory.c | 9 +++------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> index 87da78eb1abd..71e9d394816b 100644
> --- a/mm/memory.c
> +++ b/mm/memory.c
> @@ -5046,13 +5046,10 @@ vm_fault_t do_swap_page(struct vm_fault *vmf)
>  		pte = pte_mkuffd_wp(pte);
>  
>  	/*
> -	 * Same logic as in do_wp_page(); however, optimize for pages that are
> -	 * certainly not shared either because we just allocated them without
> -	 * exposing them to the swapcache or because the swap entry indicates
> -	 * exclusivity.
> +	 * Similar logic as in do_wp_page(); however, optimize for pages that are
> +	 * certainly not because the swap entry indicates exclusivity.

s/not/not shared/

but likely you should just simplify to "... pages that are certainly exclusive."

>  	 */
> -	if (!folio_test_ksm(folio) &&
> -	    (exclusive || folio_ref_count(folio) == 1)) {
> +	if (exclusive) {
>  		if ((vma->vm_flags & VM_WRITE) && !userfaultfd_pte_wp(vma, pte) &&
>  		    !pte_needs_soft_dirty_wp(vma, pte)) {
>  			pte = pte_mkwrite(pte, vma);


-- 
Cheers,

David

  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-07-02  8:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-01 23:59 [PATCH v3 0/4] mm: drop redundant lru_add_drain in anon folio reuse paths Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-01 23:59 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] mm: avoid unnecessary lru drain for wp_can_reuse_anon_folio() Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-02  8:05   ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-07-06  8:18     ` Barry Song
2026-07-06  9:12       ` Baoquan He
2026-07-06  9:17         ` Barry Song
2026-07-01 23:59 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] mm: drop stale folio_ref_count()==1 check in do_swap_page reuse logic Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-02  8:07   ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-07-02  8:14   ` David Hildenbrand (Arm) [this message]
2026-07-06  8:14     ` Barry Song
2026-07-01 23:59 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] mm: entirely remove lru_add_drain in do_swap_page Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-01 23:59 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] mm: clarify the folio_free_swap() for do_swap_page() Barry Song (Xiaomi)
2026-07-02  8:10   ` 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=3a185a5d-2f2c-4e9d-9cd9-8bdb236dfc5c@kernel.org \
    --to=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=baohua@kernel.org \
    --cc=baoquan.he@linux.dev \
    --cc=chrisl@kernel.org \
    --cc=jp.kobryn@linux.dev \
    --cc=kasong@tencent.com \
    --cc=liam@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=ljs@kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=nphamcs@gmail.com \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
    --cc=shikemeng@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=usama.arif@linux.dev \
    --cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
    --cc=youngjun.park@lge.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.