From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8FCDBC2EA; Fri, 10 Oct 2025 18:05:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760119541; cv=none; b=IOj7KcJ7m8DAvcbVCjyFZhmTBYL2Zy7WnllfQhZEMUEwDAmZsVH2xHcUTRTUUjHWzADoMbSeauUwg2MnddwV14JS8NcPoB9ZVbtb85VxkqzemhwAHj3p8H7EiraDPz/uxQAQ13A6O6Sp4IqBJrjOV3QJ9m1dukmI5NpaYfqIThQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760119541; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bXaAtd0ZAtT3g66t4s1DrZe7nl/S25MHh/OuCmnvSnI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=qu46V9vy87OJfg97ChXIzo2JJgbnoUPCWbi7e7EdqeUfqBC8KUdqaly90JecRJS3+uiLCmFV4LGiSqRhBRYveiNvfBwV3fmM1ux0nsCcVLFX9Zp0Hdt8HesvMIoCLMxjzWEGXgNpeVgFmgwlrTyGIVjYqODSgKXqCJx+Ac3v/A8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=k2Db1sDw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="k2Db1sDw" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69C6BC4CEF1; Fri, 10 Oct 2025 18:05:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1760119540; bh=bXaAtd0ZAtT3g66t4s1DrZe7nl/S25MHh/OuCmnvSnI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=k2Db1sDwNDpgB00o01QYKVNREYyMnv61ip//HC1HGaWSaZ5p97cKFfQn23vZ5NwHX pPvaMi3oITNCQIOihRHjgzxjl9z5ANOQK2d2vJTgKAC1+uiCrq5Nkf96s6UGdKB68X ssljcFmuLsUQ0s9OQkNYZ0zkV+QDoua++XRffKP2YTble2bOGzGPU/0XZbQb7zkGkW UzSq2crCL4CGfofdYxiFC1Ja2+DlXPwpllL77bQ45xutQ0tYL26zeatdPQBipEDR3Z Y0rQEvQWjtDNAMY96oBh1Iznk8UIJ0R9eI11CCl8OL7ephE5IGIzQlDITZcLQz8Puy Wgum2S2XB+I/A== Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2025 11:05:39 -0700 From: Luis Chamberlain To: Zi Yan Cc: linmiaohe@huawei.com, david@redhat.com, jane.chu@oracle.com, kernel@pankajraghav.com, syzbot+e6367ea2fdab6ed46056@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, nao.horiguchi@gmail.com, Lorenzo Stoakes , Baolin Wang , "Liam R. Howlett" , Nico Pache , Ryan Roberts , Dev Jain , Barry Song , Lance Yang , "Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/memory-failure: improve large block size folio handling. Message-ID: References: <20251010173906.3128789-1-ziy@nvidia.com> <20251010173906.3128789-3-ziy@nvidia.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20251010173906.3128789-3-ziy@nvidia.com> On Fri, Oct 10, 2025 at 01:39:06PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: > Large block size (LBS) folios cannot be split to order-0 folios but > min_order_for_folio(). Current split fails directly, but that is not > optimal. Split the folio to min_order_for_folio(), so that, after split, > only the folio containing the poisoned page becomes unusable instead. > > For soft offline, do not split the large folio if it cannot be split to > order-0. Since the folio is still accessible from userspace and premature > split might lead to potential performance loss. > > Suggested-by: Jane Chu > Signed-off-by: Zi Yan Reviewed-by: Luis Chamberlain Luis