Re: [PATCH mm-unstable 6/8] mm/hugetlb: convert alloc_migrate_huge_page to folios

[Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>]

On 01/09/23 10:26, Sidhartha Kumar wrote:
> On 1/6/23 6:54 PM, Mike Kravetz wrote:
> > On 01/03/23 13:13, Sidhartha Kumar wrote:
> > > Change alloc_huge_page_nodemask() to alloc_hugetlb_folio_nodemask() and
> > > alloc_migrate_huge_page() to alloc_migrate_hugetlb_folio(). Both functions
> > > now return a folio rather than a page.
> > 
> > >   /* mempolicy aware migration callback */
> > > @@ -2357,16 +2357,16 @@ struct page *alloc_huge_page_vma(struct hstate *h, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> > >   {
> > >   	struct mempolicy *mpol;
> > >   	nodemask_t *nodemask;
> > > -	struct page *page;
> > > +	struct folio *folio;
> > >   	gfp_t gfp_mask;
> > >   	int node;
> > >   	gfp_mask = htlb_alloc_mask(h);
> > >   	node = huge_node(vma, address, gfp_mask, &mpol, &nodemask);
> > > -	page = alloc_huge_page_nodemask(h, node, nodemask, gfp_mask);
> > > +	folio = alloc_hugetlb_folio_nodemask(h, node, nodemask, gfp_mask);
> > >   	mpol_cond_put(mpol);
> > > -	return page;
> > > +	return &folio->page;
> > 
> > Is it possible that folio could be NULL here and cause addressing exception?
> > 
> > > diff --git a/mm/migrate.c b/mm/migrate.c
> > > index 6932b3d5a9dd..fab706b78be1 100644
> > > --- a/mm/migrate.c
> > > +++ b/mm/migrate.c
> > > @@ -1622,6 +1622,7 @@ struct page *alloc_migration_target(struct page *page, unsigned long private)
> > >   	struct migration_target_control *mtc;
> > >   	gfp_t gfp_mask;
> > >   	unsigned int order = 0;
> > > +	struct folio *hugetlb_folio = NULL;
> > >   	struct folio *new_folio = NULL;
> > >   	int nid;
> > >   	int zidx;
> > > @@ -1636,7 +1637,9 @@ struct page *alloc_migration_target(struct page *page, unsigned long private)
> > >   		struct hstate *h = folio_hstate(folio);
> > >   		gfp_mask = htlb_modify_alloc_mask(h, gfp_mask);
> > > -		return alloc_huge_page_nodemask(h, nid, mtc->nmask, gfp_mask);
> > > +		hugetlb_folio = alloc_hugetlb_folio_nodemask(h, nid,
> > > +						mtc->nmask, gfp_mask);
> > > +		return &hugetlb_folio->page;
> > 
> > and, here as well?
> 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> It is possible that the folio could be null but I believe these instances
> would not cause an addressing exception because as described in [1],
> &folio->page is safe even if the folio is NULL as the page offset is at 0.
> 
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y7h4jsv6jl0XSIsk@casper.infradead.org/T/

Thanks!
I did not follow that thread and did not look closely as to whether
&folio->page was safe with folio == NULL.

I must say that it is going to take me some time to not pause and think
when coming upon &folio->page.  Perhaps that is good.

Reviewed-by: Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@oracle.com>
-- 
Mike Kravetz