Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] mm: reduce mmap_lock contention and improve page fault performance

Lorenzo Stoakes
2026-05-01T15:52:21Z

On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 01:37:14PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 12:04:22PM +0800, Barry Song (Xiaomi) wrote:
> > (1) If we need to wait for I/O completion, we still drop the per-VMA lock, as
> > current page fault handling already does. Holding it for too long may introduce
> > various priority inversion issues on mobile devices. After I/O completes, we
> > retry the page fault with the per-VMA lock, rather than falling back to
> > mmap_lock.
>
> You're going to have to do better than that. You know I hate the
> additional complexity you're adding. You need to explain why my idea of
> ripping out all the complexity now that we have per-VMA locks doesn't
> work.

After a brief eyeball I share Matthew's assessment, I really don't like this
series, it's piling on complexity for what seem like niche cases.

We already have enough weirdness in fault code honestly.

Let's maybe discuss at LSF if you're attending?

I will try to have a more thorough look through when I get a chance.

Thanks, Lorenzo