From: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
"Liam R . Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Qi Zheng <qi.zheng@linux.dev>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>, Usama Arif <usama.arif@linux.dev>,
Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
Subject: [PATCH v1] mm: unqueue deferred split folios outside the lruvec lock
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2026 15:13:07 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261013221307.850803-1-joannelkoong@gmail.com> (raw)
move_folios_to_lru(), folio_batch_move_lru() and folios_put_refs() call
folio_unqueue_deferred_split() on folios where the refcount has dropped
to zero. In these paths, folio_unqueue_deferred_split() is called with
the lruvec lock often held (move_folios_to_lru() always holds it and
folio_batch_move_lru()/folios_put_refs() usually hold it for every folio
in the batch except the first). However, it's not needed to hold the
lruvec lock.
The lruvec lock protects folio->lru and the reclaim LRU lists whereas
the deferred split queue lives on folio->_deferred_list in
deferred_split_lru. The deferred_split_lru is a list_lru with its own
per-memcg per-node lock.
There are already other existing callers that call
folio_unqueue_deferred_split() without holding the lruvec lock (eg
__folio_put(), shrink_folio_list(), __folio_migrate_mapping(), ...).
Add folio_batch_unqueue_deferred_split() and use it in
move_folios_to_lru(), folio_batch_move_lru(), and folios_put_refs() to
unqueue each batch of zero-refcount folios from the deferred split list
after the lruvec lock is released and before
mem_cgroup_uncharge_folios(). This helps shorten the lruvec lock's
critical sections, which run with IRQs disabled and are highly
contended.
Signed-off-by: Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@gmail.com>
---
mm/folio.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++-----
mm/internal.h | 1 +
mm/vmscan.c | 3 ++-
3 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/folio.c b/mm/folio.c
index 35e242b48870..85144078e635 100644
--- a/mm/folio.c
+++ b/mm/folio.c
@@ -109,6 +109,19 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__folio_put);
typedef void (*move_fn_t)(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio);
+/*
+ * Unqueue a batch of folios from the deferred split queue. This must be
+ * called after the folios' refcounts have dropped to zero and before they
+ * are uncharged (see comment above __folio_unqueue_deferred_split() for why).
+ */
+void folio_batch_unqueue_deferred_split(struct folio_batch *fbatch)
+{
+ unsigned int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < folio_batch_count(fbatch); i++)
+ folio_unqueue_deferred_split(fbatch->folios[i]);
+}
+
static void lru_add(struct lruvec *lruvec, struct folio *folio)
{
int was_unevictable = folio_test_clear_unevictable(folio);
@@ -177,14 +190,10 @@ static void folio_batch_move_lru(struct folio_batch *fbatch, move_fn_t move_fn)
*
* 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);
fbatch->folios[i] = NULL;
folio_batch_add(&free_fbatch, folio);
continue;
@@ -201,6 +210,11 @@ static void folio_batch_move_lru(struct folio_batch *fbatch, move_fn_t move_fn)
/* Cleanup filtered dead folios. */
if (is_lru_add) {
+ /*
+ * Since the folios may be part of a huge page, unqueue them
+ * from the deferred split list to avoid a dangling list entry.
+ */
+ folio_batch_unqueue_deferred_split(&free_fbatch);
mem_cgroup_uncharge_folios(&free_fbatch);
free_unref_folios(&free_fbatch);
}
@@ -1020,7 +1034,6 @@ void folios_put_refs(struct folio_batch *folios, unsigned int *refs)
free_huge_folio(folio);
continue;
}
- folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio);
__page_cache_release(folio, &lruvec, &flags);
if (j != i)
@@ -1035,6 +1048,7 @@ void folios_put_refs(struct folio_batch *folios, unsigned int *refs)
}
folios->nr = j;
+ folio_batch_unqueue_deferred_split(folios);
mem_cgroup_uncharge_folios(folios);
free_unref_folios(folios);
}
diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
index 0ca863f2639a..ac72577a6e3e 100644
--- a/mm/internal.h
+++ b/mm/internal.h
@@ -760,6 +760,7 @@ static inline bool folio_unqueue_deferred_split(struct folio *folio)
return __folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio);
}
+void folio_batch_unqueue_deferred_split(struct folio_batch *fbatch);
static inline struct folio *page_rmappable_folio(struct page *page)
{
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index 29b31446fc11..94859a830fb0 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -2007,9 +2007,9 @@ static unsigned int move_folios_to_lru(struct list_head *list, bool do_rotate)
if (unlikely(folio_put_testzero(folio))) {
__folio_clear_lru_flags(folio);
- folio_unqueue_deferred_split(folio);
if (folio_batch_add(&free_folios, folio) == 0) {
lruvec_unlock_irq(lruvec);
+ folio_batch_unqueue_deferred_split(&free_folios);
mem_cgroup_uncharge_folios(&free_folios);
free_unref_folios(&free_folios);
lruvec = NULL;
@@ -2041,6 +2041,7 @@ static unsigned int move_folios_to_lru(struct list_head *list, bool do_rotate)
lruvec_unlock_irq(lruvec);
if (free_folios.nr) {
+ folio_batch_unqueue_deferred_split(&free_folios);
mem_cgroup_uncharge_folios(&free_folios);
free_unref_folios(&free_folios);
}
--
2.52.0
next reply other threads:[~2026-10-13 22:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-13 22:13 Joanne Koong [this message]
2026-10-14 3:07 ` [PATCH v1] mm: unqueue deferred split folios outside the lruvec lock Lance Yang
2026-10-14 3:13 ` Barry Song
2026-10-14 4:24 ` Lance Yang
2026-10-14 9:31 ` 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=20261013221307.850803-1-joannelkoong@gmail.com \
--to=joannelkoong@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=qi.zheng@linux.dev \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=usama.arif@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.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