From: Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>
To: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
Cc: sarthak.sharma@arm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
david@kernel.org, liam@infradead.org, vbabka@kernel.org,
rppt@kernel.org, surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com,
dev.jain@arm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/memory: refactor finish_fault
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2026 10:57:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <akOS23WSqp_6oXpW@lucifer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260630075153.78201-1-lance.yang@linux.dev>
On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 03:51:53PM +0800, Lance Yang wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2026 at 03:50:47PM +0530, Sarthak Sharma wrote:
> >finish_fault() currently has a goto fallback implementation
> >where we try to map a large folio with PTEs. If that cannot be
> >installed, we goto fallback and go through the fallback mapping
> >path again. This looks weird and is tough to comprehend.
> >
> >Remove the goto fallback implementation and try to map the
> >whole folio if allowed. If the whole folio cannot be mapped,
> >fall back to single page mapping without repeating the whole
> >function.
> >
> >The cleanup of finish_fault() was suggested by David in [1].
> >
> >[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/3684c55a-6581-4731-b94a-19526f455a1e@kernel.org/
> >
> >Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@kernel.org>
> >Signed-off-by: Sarthak Sharma <sarthak.sharma@arm.com>
> >---
> >Tested this patch by running mm selftests on baseline and patched 7.1
> >kernels. No regressions were observed.
> >
> > mm/memory.c | 78 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> > 1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
> >index 86a973119bd4..f883b3f3850e 100644
> >--- a/mm/memory.c
> >+++ b/mm/memory.c
> >@@ -5666,18 +5666,16 @@ static bool vmf_pte_changed(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> > vm_fault_t finish_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> > {
> > struct vm_area_struct *vma = vmf->vma;
> >- struct page *page;
> >+ struct page *page, *map_page;
> > struct folio *folio;
> > vm_fault_t ret;
> > bool is_cow = (vmf->flags & FAULT_FLAG_WRITE) &&
> > !(vma->vm_flags & VM_SHARED);
> >- int type, nr_pages;
> >- unsigned long addr;
> >+ pte_t *fault_pte, *start_pte;
> >+ int type, nr_pages, nr_ptes;
> >+ unsigned long start_addr;
> > bool needs_fallback = false;
> >
> >-fallback:
> >- addr = vmf->address;
> >-
> > /* Did we COW the page? */
> > if (is_cow)
> > page = vmf->cow_page;
> >@@ -5695,7 +5693,7 @@ vm_fault_t finish_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> >- if (!needs_fallback && vma->vm_file) {
> >+ if (vma->vm_file) {
> > struct address_space *mapping = vma->vm_file->f_mapping;
> > pgoff_t file_end;
> >
> >@@ -5727,56 +5725,62 @@ vm_fault_t finish_fault(struct vm_fault *vmf)
> >
> > nr_pages = folio_nr_pages(folio);
> >
> >+ /* Initialize for single page mapping */
> >+ map_page = page;
> >+ start_addr = vmf->address;
> >+ nr_ptes = 1;
> >+
> > /* Using per-page fault to maintain the uffd semantics */
> >- if (unlikely(userfaultfd_armed(vma)) || unlikely(needs_fallback)) {
> >- nr_pages = 1;
> >- } else if (nr_pages > 1) {
> >- pgoff_t idx = folio_page_idx(folio, page);
> >- /* The page offset of vmf->address within the VMA. */
> >- pgoff_t vma_off = vmf->pgoff - vmf->vma->vm_pgoff;
> >+ if (nr_pages > 1 && likely(!needs_fallback) && likely(!userfaultfd_armed(vma))) {
> >+ unsigned long fault_page_idx = folio_page_idx(folio, page);
> >+ unsigned long pages_to_folio_end = nr_pages - fault_page_idx;
> >+
> >+ bool fits_vma = folio_within_vma(folio, vma);
> >+
> > /* The index of the entry in the pagetable for fault page. */
> > pgoff_t pte_off = pte_index(vmf->address);
> >
> >- /*
> >- * Fallback to per-page fault in case the folio size in page
> >- * cache beyond the VMA limits and PMD pagetable limits.
> >- */
> >- if (unlikely(vma_off < idx ||
> >- vma_off + (nr_pages - idx) > vma_pages(vma) ||
> >- pte_off < idx ||
> >- pte_off + (nr_pages - idx) > PTRS_PER_PTE)) {
> >- nr_pages = 1;
>
> TL;DR: nothing looks broken to me here. Just wanted to spelling out what
> this relies on :)
>
> Old code above had four range checks before installing multiple PTEs:
>
> 1) vma_off < idx
> 2) vma_off + (nr_pages - idx) > vma_pages(vma)
> 3) pte_off < idx
> 4) pte_off + (nr_pages - idx) > PTRS_PER_PTE
>
> PTE-table part looks equivalent after refactor. 3) and 4) become:
>
> 3) pte_off >= fault_page_idx
> 4) pte_off + pages_to_folio_end <= PTRS_PER_PTE
>
> where fault_page_idx is old idx, and pages_to_folio_end is old
> nr_pages - idx.
>
> Only VMA part looks different to me. Old code checked same range, based
> on fault address, that it later installed:
>
> [vma_off - idx, vma_off + (nr_pages - idx))
>
> After refactor, folio_within_vma() checks folio range:
>
> [folio->index, folio->index + folio_nr_pages(folio))
>
> while installed range is still based on fault address:
>
> [vmf->pgoff - fault_page_idx, vmf->pgoff - fault_page_idx + nr_pages)
>
> So these line up when:
>
> vmf->pgoff == folio->index + fault_page_idx
>
> Looks fine for page-cache users, since vmf->page comes from
> folio_file_page(folio, vmf->pgoff).
This to me all strongly suggests a comment might be helpful here :)
>
> [...]
>
> Cheers, Lance
Cheers, Lorenzo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-30 9:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-24 10:20 [PATCH] mm/memory: refactor finish_fault Sarthak Sharma
2026-06-25 8:52 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-06-25 9:25 ` Sarthak Sharma
2026-06-30 7:51 ` Lance Yang
2026-06-30 9:57 ` Lorenzo Stoakes [this message]
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=akOS23WSqp_6oXpW@lucifer \
--to=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=sarthak.sharma@arm.com \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.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 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.