* [PATCH] mm/fadvise: avoid remote LRU drain for mapped folio failures
@ 2026-05-06 11:23 fujunjie
2026-05-08 23:35 ` Andrew Morton
2026-05-11 5:47 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: fujunjie @ 2026-05-06 11:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle), David Hildenbrand
Cc: Jan Kara, Vlastimil Babka, Michal Hocko, Lorenzo Stoakes,
Liam R. Howlett, Mike Rapoport, Suren Baghdasaryan, linux-mm,
linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
generic_fadvise(POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED) drains the local LRU batch and
then tries to invalidate the requested page-cache range. If any folio
could not be evicted, it assumes that a remote per-cpu LRU batch might
be pinning the folio, calls lru_add_drain_all(), and walks the mapping
again.
mapping_try_invalidate() currently treats every failed
mapping_evict_folio() as a possible remote-LRU-batch failure. But
mapping_evict_folio() also fails for dirty or writeback folios, mapped
folios, and folios whose filesystem-private state cannot be released. A
global drain cannot make those folios evictable, so the drain adds
latency and cross-CPU work without addressing those failure reasons.
Mapped folios are a common false positive. They may also have transient
references, but while any page in the folio is mapped, a remote LRU drain
cannot remove the page-table references that keep the folio unevictable.
POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED does not unmap userspace mappings.
Teach the folio eviction path to report whether a failure hit the
existing refcount check on a clean, unmapped folio. Only request the
global drain for that case. This preserves the existing fallback for
failures that a remote LRU drain can plausibly fix, while avoiding it
for failure reasons that a remote drain is not expected to resolve.
On a 4-vCPU, 8G QEMU/KVM guest, a mmap streaming workload scanned a
128 MiB MAP_SHARED file in 2 MiB chunks. It called POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED
on each chunk after reading it while keeping the mapping in place. 5
rounds with 256 fadvise calls per round showed:
baseline: 112116 ns/call, 256 lru_add_drain_all() calls/round
patched: 79012 ns/call, 0 lru_add_drain_all() calls/round
A separate cross-CPU fallback test exercised the case this fallback was
originally intended to protect: CPU 0 created and wrote an 8-page file,
then CPU 1 called fsync() and POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED on it. On the patched
kernel, 10/10 rounds still called lru_add_drain_all() once and the
subsequent mincore() check saw 0 resident pages. This shows that the
patch does not remove the global drain path from this cross-CPU case.
The workload is a controlled test, not production workload proof. It
exercises the fadvise path and shows that mapped folio failures no
longer trigger global drains in this setup while the cross-CPU fallback
test continues to pass.
Signed-off-by: fujunjie <fujunjie1@qq.com>
---
mm/fadvise.c | 16 ++++++++-----
mm/internal.h | 2 +-
mm/truncate.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
3 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/fadvise.c b/mm/fadvise.c
index b63fe21416ff2..ef26c23bf35c6 100644
--- a/mm/fadvise.c
+++ b/mm/fadvise.c
@@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ int generic_fadvise(struct file *file, loff_t offset, loff_t len, int advice)
}
if (end_index >= start_index) {
- unsigned long nr_failed = 0;
+ unsigned long nr_lru_refs = 0;
/*
* It's common to FADV_DONTNEED right after
@@ -155,14 +155,18 @@ int generic_fadvise(struct file *file, loff_t offset, loff_t len, int advice)
lru_add_drain();
mapping_try_invalidate(mapping, start_index, end_index,
- &nr_failed);
+ &nr_lru_refs);
/*
- * The failures may be due to the folio being
- * in the LRU cache of a remote CPU. Drain all
- * caches and try again.
+ * Some clean, unmapped folios can fail invalidation
+ * because they are still sitting in remote per-cpu LRU
+ * batches. Failures caused by dirty/writeback state,
+ * user mappings or filesystem-private release state are
+ * not helped by a remote drain, so avoid it unless
+ * mapping_try_invalidate() found a failure that could
+ * plausibly be resolved by it.
*/
- if (nr_failed) {
+ if (nr_lru_refs) {
lru_add_drain_all();
invalidate_mapping_pages(mapping, start_index,
end_index);
diff --git a/mm/internal.h b/mm/internal.h
index 5a2ddcf68e0b6..e95e691fb4a01 100644
--- a/mm/internal.h
+++ b/mm/internal.h
@@ -562,7 +562,7 @@ bool truncate_inode_partial_folio(struct folio *folio, loff_t start,
loff_t end);
long mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping, struct folio *folio);
unsigned long mapping_try_invalidate(struct address_space *mapping,
- pgoff_t start, pgoff_t end, unsigned long *nr_failed);
+ pgoff_t start, pgoff_t end, unsigned long *nr_lru_refs);
/**
* folio_evictable - Test whether a folio is evictable.
diff --git a/mm/truncate.c b/mm/truncate.c
index 12cc89f89afcf..abd72f3d358eb 100644
--- a/mm/truncate.c
+++ b/mm/truncate.c
@@ -311,19 +311,11 @@ int generic_error_remove_folio(struct address_space *mapping,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(generic_error_remove_folio);
-/**
- * mapping_evict_folio() - Remove an unused folio from the page-cache.
- * @mapping: The mapping this folio belongs to.
- * @folio: The folio to remove.
- *
- * Safely remove one folio from the page cache.
- * It only drops clean, unused folios.
- *
- * Context: Folio must be locked.
- * Return: The number of pages successfully removed.
- */
-long mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping, struct folio *folio)
+static long __mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping,
+ struct folio *folio, bool *lru_refs)
{
+ if (lru_refs)
+ *lru_refs = false;
/* The page may have been truncated before it was locked */
if (!mapping)
return 0;
@@ -331,14 +323,38 @@ long mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping, struct folio *folio)
return 0;
/* The refcount will be elevated if any page in the folio is mapped */
if (folio_ref_count(folio) >
- folio_nr_pages(folio) + folio_has_private(folio) + 1)
+ folio_nr_pages(folio) + folio_has_private(folio) + 1) {
+ /*
+ * A remote LRU drain can only help with extra references on
+ * otherwise evictable folios. Mapped folios also have an
+ * elevated refcount, but draining LRU caches cannot unmap them.
+ */
+ if (lru_refs && !folio_mapped(folio))
+ *lru_refs = true;
return 0;
+ }
if (!filemap_release_folio(folio, 0))
return 0;
return remove_mapping(mapping, folio);
}
+/**
+ * mapping_evict_folio() - Remove an unused folio from the page-cache.
+ * @mapping: The mapping this folio belongs to.
+ * @folio: The folio to remove.
+ *
+ * Safely remove one folio from the page cache.
+ * It only drops clean, unused folios.
+ *
+ * Context: Folio must be locked.
+ * Return: The number of pages successfully removed.
+ */
+long mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping, struct folio *folio)
+{
+ return __mapping_evict_folio(mapping, folio, NULL);
+}
+
/**
* truncate_inode_pages_range - truncate range of pages specified by start & end byte offsets
* @mapping: mapping to truncate
@@ -526,13 +542,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(truncate_inode_pages_final);
* @mapping: the address_space which holds the folios to invalidate
* @start: the offset 'from' which to invalidate
* @end: the offset 'to' which to invalidate (inclusive)
- * @nr_failed: How many folio invalidations failed
+ * @nr_lru_refs: Optional counter for failures which may be due to remote
+ * per-cpu LRU refs
*
- * This function is similar to invalidate_mapping_pages(), except that it
- * returns the number of folios which could not be evicted in @nr_failed.
+ * This function is similar to invalidate_mapping_pages(), except that callers
+ * may request the number of folio eviction failures that may be resolved by
+ * draining remote per-cpu LRU batches in @nr_lru_refs.
*/
unsigned long mapping_try_invalidate(struct address_space *mapping,
- pgoff_t start, pgoff_t end, unsigned long *nr_failed)
+ pgoff_t start, pgoff_t end, unsigned long *nr_lru_refs)
{
pgoff_t indices[FOLIO_BATCH_SIZE];
struct folio_batch fbatch;
@@ -548,6 +566,7 @@ unsigned long mapping_try_invalidate(struct address_space *mapping,
for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
struct folio *folio = fbatch.folios[i];
+ bool lru_refs = false;
/* We rely upon deletion not changing folio->index */
@@ -557,18 +576,17 @@ unsigned long mapping_try_invalidate(struct address_space *mapping,
continue;
}
- ret = mapping_evict_folio(mapping, folio);
+ ret = __mapping_evict_folio(mapping, folio,
+ nr_lru_refs ? &lru_refs : NULL);
+ if (!ret && lru_refs)
+ (*nr_lru_refs)++;
folio_unlock(folio);
/*
* Invalidation is a hint that the folio is no longer
* of interest and try to speed up its reclaim.
*/
- if (!ret) {
+ if (!ret)
deactivate_file_folio(folio);
- /* Likely in the lru cache of a remote CPU */
- if (nr_failed)
- (*nr_failed)++;
- }
count += ret;
}
base-commit: 1b55f8358e35a67bf3969339ea7b86988af92f66
--
2.34.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/fadvise: avoid remote LRU drain for mapped folio failures
2026-05-06 11:23 [PATCH] mm/fadvise: avoid remote LRU drain for mapped folio failures fujunjie
@ 2026-05-08 23:35 ` Andrew Morton
2026-05-10 18:14 ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-05-11 5:47 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2026-05-08 23:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: fujunjie
Cc: Matthew Wilcox (Oracle), David Hildenbrand, Jan Kara,
Vlastimil Babka, Michal Hocko, Lorenzo Stoakes, Liam R. Howlett,
Mike Rapoport, Suren Baghdasaryan, linux-mm, linux-fsdevel,
linux-kernel
On Wed, 6 May 2026 11:23:59 +0000 fujunjie <fujunjie1@qq.com> wrote:
> generic_fadvise(POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED) drains the local LRU batch and
> then tries to invalidate the requested page-cache range. If any folio
> could not be evicted, it assumes that a remote per-cpu LRU batch might
> be pinning the folio, calls lru_add_drain_all(), and walks the mapping
> again.
>
> ...
>
> Teach the folio eviction path to report whether a failure hit the
> existing refcount check on a clean, unmapped folio. Only request the
> global drain for that case. This preserves the existing fallback for
> failures that a remote LRU drain can plausibly fix, while avoiding it
> for failure reasons that a remote drain is not expected to resolve.
>
Thanks. AI reviw asked one question:
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/tencent_DEDC345B4071ED3C9B293ACD437B9C8DBC0A@qq.com
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/fadvise: avoid remote LRU drain for mapped folio failures
2026-05-08 23:35 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2026-05-10 18:14 ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-05-11 6:52 ` Fujunjie
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Wilcox @ 2026-05-10 18:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: fujunjie, David Hildenbrand, Jan Kara, Vlastimil Babka,
Michal Hocko, Lorenzo Stoakes, Liam R. Howlett, Mike Rapoport,
Suren Baghdasaryan, linux-mm, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 04:35:49PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 6 May 2026 11:23:59 +0000 fujunjie <fujunjie1@qq.com> wrote:
>
> > generic_fadvise(POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED) drains the local LRU batch and
> > then tries to invalidate the requested page-cache range. If any folio
> > could not be evicted, it assumes that a remote per-cpu LRU batch might
> > be pinning the folio, calls lru_add_drain_all(), and walks the mapping
> > again.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Teach the folio eviction path to report whether a failure hit the
> > existing refcount check on a clean, unmapped folio. Only request the
> > global drain for that case. This preserves the existing fallback for
> > failures that a remote LRU drain can plausibly fix, while avoiding it
> > for failure reasons that a remote drain is not expected to resolve.
> >
>
> Thanks. AI reviw asked one question:
> https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/tencent_DEDC345B4071ED3C9B293ACD437B9C8DBC0A@qq.com
That's a pretty poor quality review.
My question is why we do this bizarre thing of switching between an
unsigned long and a bool pointer.
I would also avoid creating __mapping_evict_folio() and do the test for
folio_mapped() in mapping_try_invalidate(). It all feels a bit weird
(both this patch and the original code), and probably needs a lot more
thought, which I'm not in a position to do right now.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/fadvise: avoid remote LRU drain for mapped folio failures
2026-05-06 11:23 [PATCH] mm/fadvise: avoid remote LRU drain for mapped folio failures fujunjie
2026-05-08 23:35 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2026-05-11 5:47 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-05-11 6:46 ` Fujunjie
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand (Arm) @ 2026-05-11 5:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: fujunjie, Andrew Morton, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)
Cc: Jan Kara, Vlastimil Babka, Michal Hocko, Lorenzo Stoakes,
Liam R. Howlett, Mike Rapoport, Suren Baghdasaryan, linux-mm,
linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel
> -long mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping, struct folio *folio)
> +static long __mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping,
> + struct folio *folio, bool *lru_refs)
> {
> + if (lru_refs)
> + *lru_refs = false;
> /* The page may have been truncated before it was locked */
> if (!mapping)
> return 0;
> @@ -331,14 +323,38 @@ long mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping, struct folio *folio)
> return 0;
> /* The refcount will be elevated if any page in the folio is mapped */
> if (folio_ref_count(folio) >
> - folio_nr_pages(folio) + folio_has_private(folio) + 1)
> + folio_nr_pages(folio) + folio_has_private(folio) + 1) {
> + /*
> + * A remote LRU drain can only help with extra references on
> + * otherwise evictable folios. Mapped folios also have an
> + * elevated refcount, but draining LRU caches cannot unmap them.
> + */
> + if (lru_refs && !folio_mapped(folio))
> + *lru_refs = true;
How can you conclude that it's a LRU refs? Could also just be something trivial
like a remaining GUP reference, or am I wrong?
--
Cheers,
David
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/fadvise: avoid remote LRU drain for mapped folio failures
2026-05-11 5:47 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
@ 2026-05-11 6:46 ` Fujunjie
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Fujunjie @ 2026-05-11 6:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Hildenbrand (Arm)
Cc: Jan Kara, Michal Hocko, Lorenzo Stoakes, linux-mm, linux-fsdevel,
linux-kernel, Matthew Wilcox (Oracle), Andrew Morton
On 5/11/2026 1:47 PM, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
>> -long mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping, struct folio *folio)
>> +static long __mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping,
>> + struct folio *folio, bool *lru_refs)
>> {
>> + if (lru_refs)
>> + *lru_refs = false;
>> /* The page may have been truncated before it was locked */
>> if (!mapping)
>> return 0;
>> @@ -331,14 +323,38 @@ long mapping_evict_folio(struct address_space *mapping, struct folio *folio)
>> return 0;
>> /* The refcount will be elevated if any page in the folio is mapped */
>> if (folio_ref_count(folio) >
>> - folio_nr_pages(folio) + folio_has_private(folio) + 1)
>> + folio_nr_pages(folio) + folio_has_private(folio) + 1) {
>> + /*
>> + * A remote LRU drain can only help with extra references on
>> + * otherwise evictable folios. Mapped folios also have an
>> + * elevated refcount, but draining LRU caches cannot unmap them.
>> + */
>> + if (lru_refs && !folio_mapped(folio))
>> + *lru_refs = true;
>
> How can you conclude that it's a LRU refs? Could also just be something trivial
> like a remaining GUP reference, or am I wrong?
>
You're right. The elevated refcount does not prove that the extra
reference is from a remote LRU batch; it could be GUP or another transient
reference.
The intent was to use this as an approximate filter: avoid the remote
drain for failures where it clearly cannot help, such as mapped folios,
rather than to prove the exact source of the extra reference.
"lru_refs" is too strong or misleading as a name. For v2 I will take
Matthew's suggestion into account as well: avoid adding
__mapping_evict_folio(), do the folio_mapped() test in
mapping_try_invalidate(), and think more carefully about where the
fallback boundary should be. I will also use naming that describes the
decision more accurately rather than implying that the extra reference
has been proven to be an LRU-batch reference.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mm/fadvise: avoid remote LRU drain for mapped folio failures
2026-05-10 18:14 ` Matthew Wilcox
@ 2026-05-11 6:52 ` Fujunjie
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Fujunjie @ 2026-05-11 6:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew Wilcox
Cc: David Hildenbrand, Jan Kara, Michal Hocko, Lorenzo Stoakes,
Suren Baghdasaryan, linux-mm, linux-fsdevel, linux-kernel,
Andrew Morton
On 5/11/2026 2:14 AM, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 04:35:49PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Wed, 6 May 2026 11:23:59 +0000 fujunjie <fujunjie1@qq.com> wrote:
>>
>>> generic_fadvise(POSIX_FADV_DONTNEED) drains the local LRU batch and
>>> then tries to invalidate the requested page-cache range. If any folio
>>> could not be evicted, it assumes that a remote per-cpu LRU batch might
>>> be pinning the folio, calls lru_add_drain_all(), and walks the mapping
>>> again.
>>>
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Teach the folio eviction path to report whether a failure hit the
>>> existing refcount check on a clean, unmapped folio. Only request the
>>> global drain for that case. This preserves the existing fallback for
>>> failures that a remote LRU drain can plausibly fix, while avoiding it
>>> for failure reasons that a remote drain is not expected to resolve.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks. AI reviw asked one question:
>> https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/tencent_DEDC345B4071ED3C9B293ACD437B9C8DBC0A@qq.com
>
> That's a pretty poor quality review.
>
> My question is why we do this bizarre thing of switching between an
> unsigned long and a bool pointer.
>
> I would also avoid creating __mapping_evict_folio() and do the test for
> folio_mapped() in mapping_try_invalidate(). It all feels a bit weird
> (both this patch and the original code), and probably needs a lot more
> thought, which I'm not in a position to do right now.
Thanks,agreed.
The count is not really used as a count by the fadvise path; it only gates
whether to do one remote drain and retry. Also, adding
__mapping_evict_folio() just to pass back this bit makes the interface more
awkward than it needs to be.
I will rework this for v2 to keep mapping_evict_folio() unchanged and do
the folio_mapped() check in mapping_try_invalidate(), as you suggested.
I will also think more carefully about the fallback boundary and use less
misleading naming, since an elevated refcount does not by itself prove a
remote LRU-batch reference.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-05-11 6:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-05-06 11:23 [PATCH] mm/fadvise: avoid remote LRU drain for mapped folio failures fujunjie
2026-05-08 23:35 ` Andrew Morton
2026-05-10 18:14 ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-05-11 6:52 ` Fujunjie
2026-05-11 5:47 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-05-11 6:46 ` Fujunjie
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox