From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@google.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>,
Binbin Wu <binbin.wu@linux.intel.com>,
Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@gentwo.org>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
JP Kobryn <jp.kobryn@linux.dev>, Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Kairui Song <ryncsn@gmail.com>, Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@kernel.org>,
Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>,
Leonardo Bras <leobras.c@gmail.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Minchan Kim <minchan@kernel.org>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@linux.dev>, Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com>,
Yu Zhao <yuzhao@google.com>, Zach O'Keefe <zokeefe@google.com>,
Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: [PATCH 04/25] mm/fbatch: lru bit set, no extra ref, while folio on per-cpu fbatch
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2026 07:01:20 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e0887417-85a7-453e-e733-561dc11db08f@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <14a16945-529b-8bc0-ab38-3ea97e54e223@google.com>
Treat folios on a per-cpu fbatch as if they were already on the lruvec:
with PG_lru set, without holding an extra reference. This will enable
the removal of most lru_add_drain() and lru_add_drain_all() calls soon.
Recognize such a folio by 0x02 set in the folio->lru.next pointer by
folio_add_lru(). Then lruvec_del_folio() (aided by "lru_add_del_folio")
can pretend to unlink it, and folio_batch_move_lru()'s lru_add case can
check whether one of the others has already moved it to lruvec.
Let folio->lru.next point to the lru_add fbatch entry, but this is now
just for debugging: it seemed to be important for folio_batch_move_lru()
to distinguish fresh from stale entries, but then it turned out that it
has to processs them identically.
Activate, deactivates and move_tail, holding no reference on the folio,
might come to act on a stale folio when the fbatch is drained: but it's
acquired by try_get and test_clear_lru, so safe even when suboptimal.
Reclaim is not an exact science, and there have been no complaints of
missed actions since 5.11 commit fc574c23558c ("mm/swap.c: serialize
memcg changes in pagevec_lru_move_fn") introduced the TestClearPageLRU
protocol: so don't expect complaints of a few surprisingly taken actions.
Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
---
include/linux/mm_inline.h | 19 ++++++
include/linux/mm_types.h | 4 +-
mm/folio.c | 119 +++++++++++++-------------------------
mm/huge_memory.c | 6 +-
4 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 82 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/mm_inline.h b/include/linux/mm_inline.h
index 621c8653d8f7..1ecaf2ef9f2b 100644
--- a/include/linux/mm_inline.h
+++ b/include/linux/mm_inline.h
@@ -343,6 +343,23 @@ static inline void folio_migrate_refs(struct folio *new, const struct folio *old
}
#endif /* CONFIG_LRU_GEN */
+enum {
+ LRU_NEXT_NEVER_TAIL = 0, /* Used by a tail's compound_head */
+ LRU_NEXT_BATCHED = 1, /* Not used by any aligned pointer */
+ NR_LRU_NEXT_FLAGS
+};
+
+static __always_inline
+bool lru_add_del_folio(struct folio *folio)
+{
+ /* BUG_ON(folio_test_lru(folio)); */
+ if (!(folio->lru_next & BIT(LRU_NEXT_BATCHED)))
+ return false;
+ folio->lru.next = LIST_POISON1;
+ /* BUG_ON(folio->lru_next & BIT(LRU_NEXT_BATCHED)); */
+ return true;
+}
+
static __always_inline
void lruvec_add_folio(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio)
{
@@ -384,6 +401,8 @@ void lruvec_del_folio(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio)
if (lru_gen_del_folio(lruvec, folio, false))
return;
+ if (lru_add_del_folio(folio))
+ return;
if (lru != LRU_UNEVICTABLE)
list_del(&folio->lru);
diff --git a/include/linux/mm_types.h b/include/linux/mm_types.h
index 939b5ea8c9e0..2b1a1f983a91 100644
--- a/include/linux/mm_types.h
+++ b/include/linux/mm_types.h
@@ -410,10 +410,8 @@ struct folio {
union {
struct list_head lru;
/* private: avoid cluttering the output */
- /* For the Unevictable "LRU list" slot */
struct {
- /* Avoid compound_info */
- void *__filler;
+ unsigned long lru_next;
/* public: */
unsigned int mlock_count;
/* private: */
diff --git a/mm/folio.c b/mm/folio.c
index a7010ae3edff..88e3ebd7e652 100644
--- a/mm/folio.c
+++ b/mm/folio.c
@@ -151,57 +151,34 @@ static void folio_batch_move_lru(struct folio_batch *fbatch, move_fn_t move_fn)
int i;
struct lruvec *lruvec = NULL;
unsigned long flags = 0;
- struct folio_batch free_fbatch;
- bool is_lru_add = (move_fn == lru_add);
-
- /*
- * If we're adding to the LRU, preemptively filter dead folios. Use
- * this dedicated folio batch for temp storage and deferred cleanup.
- */
- if (is_lru_add)
- folio_batch_init(&free_fbatch);
for (i = 0; i < folio_batch_count(fbatch); i++) {
struct folio *folio = fbatch->folios[i];
- /* block memcg migration while the folio moves between lru */
- if (!is_lru_add && !folio_test_clear_lru(folio))
- continue;
-
- /*
- * Filter dead folios by moving them from the add batch to the temp
- * batch for freeing after this loop.
- *
- * We're bypassing normal cleanup. Clear flags that are not
- * applicable to dead folios.
- *
- * Since the folio may be part of a huge page, unqueue from
- * deferred split list to avoid a dangling list entry.
- */
- if (is_lru_add && folio_ref_freeze(folio, 1)) {
- __folio_clear_active(folio);
- __folio_clear_unevictable(folio);
- folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio);
+ if (!folio_try_get(folio)) {
fbatch->folios[i] = NULL;
- folio_batch_add(&free_fbatch, folio);
continue;
}
+ if (!folio_test_clear_lru(folio))
+ continue;
+
+ /* Do not add to LRU if it has already been added */
+ if (move_fn == lru_add && !lru_add_del_folio(folio))
+ goto restore_lru;
+
folio_lruvec_relock_irqsave(folio, &lruvec, &flags);
move_fn(lruvec, folio);
+ /* Do add to LRU if not already there (move_fn skipped) */
+ if (lru_add_del_folio(folio))
+ lruvec_add_folio(lruvec, folio);
+restore_lru:
folio_set_lru(folio);
}
if (lruvec)
lruvec_unlock_irqrestore(lruvec, flags);
-
- /* Cleanup filtered dead folios. */
- if (is_lru_add) {
- mem_cgroup_uncharge_folios(&free_fbatch);
- free_unref_folios(&free_fbatch);
- }
-
folios_put(fbatch);
}
@@ -210,8 +187,6 @@ static void __folio_batch_add_and_move(struct folio_batch __percpu *fbatch,
{
unsigned long flags;
- folio_get(folio);
-
if (disable_irq)
local_lock_irqsave(&cpu_fbatches.lock_irq, flags);
else
@@ -339,7 +314,6 @@ static void lru_activate(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio)
if (folio_test_active(folio) || folio_test_unevictable(folio))
return;
-
lruvec_del_folio(lruvec, folio);
folio_set_active(folio);
lruvec_add_folio(lruvec, folio);
@@ -355,37 +329,12 @@ void folio_activate(struct folio *folio)
!folio_test_lru(folio))
return;
- folio_batch_add_and_move(folio, lru_activate);
-}
-
-static void __lru_cache_activate_folio(struct folio *folio)
-{
- struct folio_batch *fbatch;
- int i;
-
- local_lock(&cpu_fbatches.lock);
- fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_fbatches.lru_add);
-
/*
- * Search backwards on the optimistic assumption that the folio being
- * activated has just been added to this batch. Note that only
- * the local batch is examined as a !LRU folio could be in the
- * process of being released, reclaimed, migrated or on a remote
- * batch that is currently being drained. Furthermore, marking
- * a remote batch's folio active potentially hits a race where
- * a folio is marked active just after it is added to the inactive
- * list causing accounting errors and BUG_ON checks to trigger.
+ * XXX: It is curiously difficult to recreate safely the old
+ * __lru_cache_activate_folio() optimization (folio_set_active()
+ * directly if it's on the local lru_add fbatch): revisit later.
*/
- for (i = folio_batch_count(fbatch) - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
- struct folio *batch_folio = fbatch->folios[i];
-
- if (batch_folio == folio) {
- folio_set_active(folio);
- break;
- }
- }
-
- local_unlock(&cpu_fbatches.lock);
+ folio_batch_add_and_move(folio, lru_activate);
}
#ifdef CONFIG_LRU_GEN
@@ -476,16 +425,7 @@ void folio_mark_accessed(struct folio *folio)
* unevictable page accessed has no effect.
*/
} else if (!folio_test_active(folio)) {
- /*
- * If the folio is on the LRU, queue it for activation via
- * cpu_fbatches.lru_activate. Otherwise, assume the folio is in a
- * folio_batch, mark it active and it'll be moved to the active
- * LRU on the next drain.
- */
- if (folio_test_lru(folio))
- folio_activate(folio);
- else
- __lru_cache_activate_folio(folio);
+ folio_activate(folio);
folio_clear_referenced(folio);
workingset_activation(folio);
}
@@ -505,6 +445,10 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(folio_mark_accessed);
*/
void folio_add_lru(struct folio *folio)
{
+ struct folio_batch *fbatch;
+ unsigned long lru_next;
+ bool full;
+
VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_active(folio) &&
folio_test_unevictable(folio), folio);
VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_lru(folio), folio);
@@ -524,7 +468,26 @@ void folio_add_lru(struct folio *folio)
folio_mark_accessed(folio);
}
- folio_batch_add_and_move(folio, lru_add);
+ local_lock(&cpu_fbatches.lock);
+ fbatch = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_fbatches.lru_add);
+
+ /* Storing this address is only for debugging */
+ lru_next = (unsigned long)&fbatch->folios[fbatch->nr];
+ /* This mask will do nothing on 64-bit */
+ lru_next &= ~(BIT(NR_LRU_NEXT_FLAGS) - 1);
+ lru_next |= BIT(LRU_NEXT_BATCHED);
+ folio->lru_next = lru_next;
+
+ full = !folio_batch_add(fbatch, folio);
+
+ /* Ensure folio->lru_next visible to folio_test_clear_lru() callers */
+ smp_mb__before_atomic();
+ folio_set_lru(folio);
+
+ if (full || !folio_may_be_lru_cached(folio) || lru_cache_disabled())
+ folio_batch_move_lru(fbatch, lru_add);
+
+ local_unlock(&cpu_fbatches.lock);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(folio_add_lru);
diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index 644d6905b49c..98b1d0ea50f0 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -3993,8 +3993,12 @@ static int __folio_freeze_and_split_unmapped(struct folio *folio, unsigned int n
}
/* lock lru list/PageCompound, ref frozen by page_ref_freeze */
- if (do_lru)
+ if (do_lru) {
lruvec = folio_lruvec_lock(folio);
+ /* Move from fbatch to lruvec before lru_add_split_folio()s */
+ if (lru_add_del_folio(folio))
+ lruvec_add_folio(lruvec, folio);
+ }
ret = __split_unmapped_folio(folio, new_order, split_at, xas,
mapping, split_type);
--
2.51.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-24 14:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-24 13:49 [PATCH 00/25] mm/fbatch: drain lru_add_drain() and _all() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 13:52 ` [PATCH 01/25] mm/fbatch: remove !CONFIG_SMP special case of folio_activate() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 13:55 ` [PATCH 02/25] mm/fbatch: allow folios_put_refs() to skip xa_is_value() entries Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 13:58 ` [PATCH 03/25] mm/fbatch: temporarily disable lazyfree and mlock+munlock batching Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:01 ` Hugh Dickins [this message]
2026-08-24 14:03 ` [PATCH 05/25] mm/fbatch: lru_add_del_folio()+folio_add_lru() after clear_lru() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:06 ` [PATCH 06/25] mm/fbatch: fbatch_drain_lazyfree(onstack fbatch) before ptl unlock Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:09 ` [PATCH 07/25] mm/fbatch: LRU_NEXT_ACTIVATE bit to optimize folio_activate() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:11 ` [PATCH 08/25] mm/fbatch: replace mlock_new_folio() by __folio_add_lru(,mlockit) Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:14 ` [PATCH 09/25] mm/fbatch: restore mlock+munlock batching, without extra ref Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:16 ` [PATCH 10/25] mm/fbatch: remove several uses of mlock_drain_local() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:18 ` [PATCH 11/25] mm/fbatch: remove migration's PAGE_WAS_MLOCKED lru_add_drain() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:20 ` [PATCH 12/25] mm/fbatch: remove percpu_pvec_drained and folios_put() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:23 ` [PATCH 13/25] mm/fbatch: no lru_add_drain() to collect_longterm_unpinnable_folios() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:55 ` [PATCH alt " Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 18:42 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-08-24 14:25 ` [PATCH 14/25] mm/fbatch: no lru_add_drain() nor _all() for memfd_wait_for_pins() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:27 ` [PATCH 15/25] mm/fbatch: remove shake_folio() shake_page() from memory-failure Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:30 ` [PATCH 16/25] mm/fbatch: remove lru_cache_disable(() from NUMA folio migration Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:32 ` [PATCH 17/25] mm/fbatch: no lru_cache_disable() in __alloc_contig_migrate_range() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:34 ` [PATCH 18/25] mm/fbatch: remove lru_add_drain() and _all() calls from various Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:36 ` [PATCH 19/25] mm/fbatch: vm/stat_refresh include lru_add_drain() on each cpu Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:39 ` [PATCH 20/25] s390/fbatch: no lru_add_drain_all() in s390_wiggle_split_folio() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:41 ` [PATCH 21/25] block/fbatch: no lru_add_drain_all() in invalidate_bdev() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:44 ` [PATCH 22/25] fs/fbatch: drop_caches invalidate_bh_lrus() not lru_add_drain_all() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:47 ` [PATCH 23/25] fs,mm/fbatch: use invalidate_bh_lrus() not invalidate_bh_lrus_cpu() Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:49 ` [PATCH 24/25] fs,mm/fbatch: lru_cache_disable() keep off buffer_head lrus only Hugh Dickins
2026-08-24 14:51 ` [PATCH 25/25] mm/fbatch: move lru_add_drain_all() declaration to mm/internal.h Hugh Dickins
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=e0887417-85a7-453e-e733-561dc11db08f@google.com \
--to=hughd@google.com \
--cc=ackerleytng@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=binbin.wu@linux.intel.com \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jack@suse.cz \
--cc=jp.kobryn@linux.dev \
--cc=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=leobras.c@gmail.com \
--cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=minchan@kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=ryncsn@gmail.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=yuzhao@google.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
--cc=zokeefe@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox