Re: [PATCH RFC v3 01/19] mm: thread user_addr through page allocator for cache-friendly zeroing

Gregory Price
2026-04-23T14:57:13Z

On Thu, Apr 23, 2026 at 04:13:50PM +0200, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
> On 4/23/26 15:42, Gregory Price wrote:
>
> Maybe we could forward the vma+addr here and call a vma_alloc_froze_folio() if
> we have a VMA+addr to have a clean interface.
>
> But really, that hugetlb code is rather messy. I'd vote for leaving hugetlb
> alone on a v1, and focusing on non-hugetlb first.
>

If we're ok increasing the buddy surface this way, then I'd vote for
only updating the exact interfaces that MST needs to update for his use
case in a base set of patches, and then have each additional updated
location (or logical set of locations) updated in follow-ups.

My initial go around with this - the patch was hard to read at best.

But I also think we should also seriously consider not increasing the
surface of the buddy. We already have two patterns (either you need to
call folio_zero_user() or you don't) and adding the wrappers to handle
this internally means we have 3.

It's a nice to have, but i'm not sure it decreases maintenance issues.

Just my 2-cents for what it's worth.

~Gregory