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

David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-24T07:28:49Z

On 4/23/26 16:57, Gregory Price wrote:
> 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.

Exactly, that's why I am saying that vma_alloc_folio() is the only external
interface people should be using with a user address. all other _noprof helpers
are supposed to be internal.

For hugetlb, we might need another interface for frozen folios later, which is
why I suggest to defer that.

--
Cheers,

David