From: "Brendan Jackman" <brendan.jackman@linux.dev>
To: "Hao Ge" <hao.ge@linux.dev>,
"Suren Baghdasaryan" <surenb@google.com>,
"Brendan Jackman" <brendan.jackman@linux.dev>
Cc: "Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)" <vbabka@kernel.org>,
"Brendan Jackman" <jackmanb@google.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@suse.com>,
"Johannes Weiner" <hannes@cmpxchg.org>, "Zi Yan" <ziy@nvidia.com>,
"Muchun Song" <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
"Oscar Salvador" <osalvador@suse.de>,
"David Hildenbrand" <david@kernel.org>,
"Lorenzo Stoakes" <ljs@kernel.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
"Mike Rapoport" <rppt@kernel.org>,
"Matthew Brost" <matthew.brost@intel.com>,
"Joshua Hahn" <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>,
"Rakie Kim" <rakie.kim@sk.com>,
"Byungchul Park" <byungchul@sk.com>,
"Ying Huang" <ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com>,
"Alistair Popple" <apopple@nvidia.com>,
"Hao Li" <hao.li@linux.dev>, "Christoph Lameter" <cl@gentwo.org>,
"David Rientjes" <rientjes@google.com>,
"Roman Gushchin" <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
"Sebastian Andrzej Siewior" <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
"Clark Williams" <clrkwllms@kernel.org>,
"Steven Rostedt" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
"Harry Yoo (Oracle)" <harry@kernel.org>,
"Gregory Price" <gourry@gourry.net>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: unify __alloc_frozen_pages[_nolock]_noprof()
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2026 08:33:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DJFFTJZGYZ91.6Y7J8M13KU5@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <267e070f-adc2-4f42-b528-746f852d9ef4@linux.dev>
On Mon Jun 22, 2026 at 1:58 AM UTC, Hao Ge wrote:
>
> On 2026/6/20 02:08, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2026 at 4:57 AM Brendan Jackman
>> <brendan.jackman@linux.dev> wrote:
>>> On Thu Jun 18, 2026 at 2:22 AM UTC, Hao Ge wrote:
>>>> On 2026/6/18 01:14, Brendan Jackman wrote:
>>>>> On Wed Jun 17, 2026 at 4:49 PM UTC, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 9:39 AM Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
>>>>>> <vbabka@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> +Cc Alexei
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 6/17/26 17:29, Brendan Jackman wrote:
>>>>>>>> Currently the core allocator code is controlled by ALLOC_NOLOCK, but the
>>>>>>> It's not, it's ALLOC_TRYLOCK! Thanks for proving that we need to rename it
>>>>>>> to ALLOC_NOLOCK:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/DJ9QPTO2WXNB.10E88ZHWRDHB0@gmail.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So you just won the job to do the rename :) I think it should be done before
>>>>>>> this patch, so that the new usages and other _trylock names introduced here
>>>>>>> can be done as _nolock outright.
>>>>> Ack. I'll aim to send that tomorrow once Sashiko has caught up.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> main entry point function is significantly different from the normal
>>>>>>>> __alloc_frozen_pages_nolock(), this is tiring when reading the code.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Plumb the ALLOC_NOLOCK control one layer up in the call stack: create
>>>>>>>> an alloc_flags argument to __alloc_frozen_pages_nolock() (which is only
>>>>>>>> exposed to mm/) and then turn the nolock variant into a thin wrapper
>>>>>>>> that just sets that flag (as well as handling NUMA_NO_NODE, similar to
>>>>>>>> how some of the wrappers in gfp.h do).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rationale that this doesn't change anything:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1. Simple bits: A bunch of the nolock-specific handling is just moved to
>>>>>>>> the new alloc_order_allowed(), alloc_trylock_allowed() and
>>>>>>>> gfp_trylock.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. __alloc_frozen_pages_noprof() has some extra logic that wasn't
>>>>>>>> previously in the nolock variant:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> a. Application of gfp_allowed_mask; this only affects early boot, and
>>>>>>>> only flags that affect the slowpath get changed here.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> b. Application of current_gfp_context() - also only affects the
>>>>>>>> slowpath
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 3. The slowpath itself: this is now just explicitly skipped under
>>>>>>>> !ALLOC_TRYLOCK.
>>>>>>> I'll have to ponder it more closely.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ulterior motive: adding an alloc_flags arg to the allocator's
>>>>>>>> mm-internal entrypoint can later be used to do more allocation
>>>>>>>> customisation without needing to create new GFP flags.
>>>>>>> Ack.
>>>>>> I think this change might also help us in removing __GFP_NO_CODETAG
>>>>> Nice, this actually looks trivial? I can probably just tack it onto the
>>>>> v2 for this patch/series.
>>>>>
>>>>>> introduced in [1] and being the only user of __GFP_NO_OBJ_EXT once
>>>>>> Vlastimil's patchset removing other __GFP_NO_OBJ_EXT users lands.
>>>>>> CC'ing Hao as he is brainstorming ways to remove __GFP_NO_CODETAG, and
>>>>>> this might be the answer.
>>>>
>>>> Hi Brendan, Suren,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for CC'ing me, Suren. This is indeed a viable approach
>>>>
>>>> and I believe it brings us one step closer to removing
>>>>
>>>> __GFP_NO_CODETAG entirely.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Brendan, I'd actually put together a rough local implementation
>>>>
>>>> earlier with mostly the same core idea as yours, and this change
>>>>
>>>> would indeed be minimal based on your patch.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks a lot for being interested in tacking this into your v2 patch series.
>>> Oh, I just took a look and it's a bit more fiddly than I thought because
>>> alloc_tag.c is actually in lib/ not mm/.
>
> Hi Suren and Bredan
>
>
>> One option is to move alloc_tag.c into mm/ (while keeping more generic
>> codetag.c in lib/). From a quick look, that seems doable and probably
>> the easiest approach.
>>
>>> How did you tackle that, can you share your implementation? It would be
>>> nice if we can avoid exposing alloc_flags in gfp.h.
>
> First, I introduced the ALLOC_NO_CODETAG flag as shown below:
>
> @@ -1478,6 +1480,7 @@ unsigned int reclaim_clean_pages_from_list(struct
> zone *zone,
> #define ALLOC_HIGHATOMIC 0x200 /* Allows access to
> MIGRATE_HIGHATOMIC */
> #define ALLOC_TRYLOCK 0x400 /* Only use spin_trylock in
> allocation path */
> #define ALLOC_KSWAPD 0x800 /* allow waking of kswapd,
> __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM set */
> +#define ALLOC_NO_CODETAG 0x1000 /* skip codetag tracking for this
> allocation */
>
>
> Then, mirroring __alloc_pages_noprof, we wrapped a helper function named
> alloc_pages_noprof_notag.
>
>
> @@ -5252,13 +5335,25 @@ struct page *__alloc_pages_noprof(gfp_t gfp,
> unsigned int order,
> {
> struct page *page;
>
> - page = __alloc_frozen_pages_noprof(gfp, order, preferred_nid,
> nodemask);
> + page = __alloc_frozen_pages_noprof(gfp, order, preferred_nid,
> nodemask, 0);
> if (page)
> set_page_refcounted(page);
> return page;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(__alloc_pages_noprof);
>
> +struct page *alloc_pages_noprof_notag(gfp_t gfp, unsigned int order)
> +{
> + struct page *page;
> +
> + page = __alloc_frozen_pages_noprof(gfp, order, numa_node_id(), NULL,
> + ALLOC_NO_CODETAG);
> + if (page)
> + set_page_refcounted(page);
> + return page;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(alloc_pages_noprof_notag);
>
>
> Lastly, we exported this function in gfp.h as shown below:
>
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h
> index 51ef13ed756e..ac6e837ac8c0 100644
> --- a/include/linux/gfp.h
> +++ b/include/linux/gfp.h
> @@ -234,6 +234,9 @@ struct folio *__folio_alloc_noprof(gfp_t gfp,
> unsigned int order, int preferred_
> nodemask_t *nodemask);
> #define __folio_alloc(...) alloc_hooks(__folio_alloc_noprof(__VA_ARGS__))
>
> +struct page *alloc_pages_noprof_notag(gfp_t gfp, unsigned int order);
> +#define alloc_pages_notag(...)
> alloc_hooks(alloc_pages_noprof_notag(__VA_ARGS__))
>
>
> Hope this information helps you.
Cool, thanks! On Friday I also tried doing it by just moving the .c
file and that also seems to be pretty practical.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-22 8:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-17 15:29 [PATCH] mm/page_alloc: unify __alloc_frozen_pages[_nolock]_noprof() Brendan Jackman
2026-06-17 16:39 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
2026-06-17 16:49 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-06-17 17:14 ` Brendan Jackman
2026-06-18 2:22 ` Hao Ge
2026-06-19 11:57 ` Brendan Jackman
2026-06-19 18:08 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2026-06-22 1:58 ` Hao Ge
2026-06-22 8:33 ` Brendan Jackman [this message]
2026-06-18 6:56 ` Hao Ge
2026-06-19 8:03 ` Brendan Jackman
2026-06-19 3:56 ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-06-19 8:17 ` Brendan Jackman
2026-06-19 8:43 ` Brendan Jackman
2026-06-22 8:24 ` Vlastimil Babka (SUSE)
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=DJFFTJZGYZ91.6Y7J8M13KU5@linux.dev \
--to=brendan.jackman@linux.dev \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=apopple@nvidia.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=byungchul@sk.com \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=clrkwllms@kernel.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=gourry@gourry.net \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hao.ge@linux.dev \
--cc=hao.li@linux.dev \
--cc=harry@kernel.org \
--cc=jackmanb@google.com \
--cc=joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=matthew.brost@intel.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=rakie.kim@sk.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
--cc=ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com \
--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