public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ye Liu <ye.liu@linux.dev>
To: Joshua Hahn <joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
	"Matthew Wilcox (Oracle)" <willy@infradead.org>,
	Ye Liu <liuye@kylinos.cn>, Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
	"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
	Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
	Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm/vmstat: remove unused __node_stat_* wrappers
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2026 13:51:02 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c55c49d7-642b-4b99-a2c7-053cb88541d0@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260415022910.1890050-1-joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com>



在 2026/4/15 10:29, Joshua Hahn 写道:
> On Wed, 15 Apr 2026 08:50:54 +0800 Ye Liu <ye.liu@linux.dev> wrote:
> 
>>
>>
>> 在 2026/4/14 22:59, Joshua Hahn 写道:
>>> On Tue, 14 Apr 2026 17:15:20 +0800 Ye Liu <ye.liu@linux.dev> wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Ye Liu <liuye@kylinos.cn>
>>>>
>>>> Replace the single call to __node_stat_mod_folio()
>>>> with node_stat_mod_folio(), and remove the dead inline __node_stat_*
>>>> wrapper definitions from include/linux/vmstat.h.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ye Liu <liuye@kylinos.cn>
>>>> ---
>>>>  include/linux/vmstat.h | 18 ------------------
>>>>  mm/page-writeback.c    |  2 +-
>>>>  2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/vmstat.h b/include/linux/vmstat.h
>>>> index 3c9c266cf782..54da7d820f78 100644
>>>> --- a/include/linux/vmstat.h
>>>> +++ b/include/linux/vmstat.h
>>>> @@ -440,24 +440,6 @@ static inline void zone_stat_sub_folio(struct folio *folio,
>>>>  	mod_zone_page_state(folio_zone(folio), item, -folio_nr_pages(folio));
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>> -static inline void __node_stat_mod_folio(struct folio *folio,
>>>> -		enum node_stat_item item, long nr)
>>>> -{
>>>> -	__mod_node_page_state(folio_pgdat(folio), item, nr);
>>>> -}
>>>> -
>>>> -static inline void __node_stat_add_folio(struct folio *folio,
>>>> -		enum node_stat_item item)
>>>> -{
>>>> -	__mod_node_page_state(folio_pgdat(folio), item, folio_nr_pages(folio));
>>>> -}
>>>> -
>>>> -static inline void __node_stat_sub_folio(struct folio *folio,
>>>> -		enum node_stat_item item)
>>>> -{
>>>> -	__mod_node_page_state(folio_pgdat(folio), item, -folio_nr_pages(folio));
>>>> -}
>>>> -
>>>>  static inline void node_stat_mod_folio(struct folio *folio,
>>>>  		enum node_stat_item item, long nr)
>>>>  {
>>>> diff --git a/mm/page-writeback.c b/mm/page-writeback.c
>>>> index 6f9b7b081ab7..ed3301753e89 100644
>>>> --- a/mm/page-writeback.c
>>>> +++ b/mm/page-writeback.c
>>>> @@ -2627,7 +2627,7 @@ static void folio_account_dirtied(struct folio *folio,
>>>>  
>>>>  		lruvec_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_FILE_DIRTY, nr);
>>>>  		__zone_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_ZONE_WRITE_PENDING, nr);
>>>> -		__node_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_DIRTIED, nr);
>>>> +		node_stat_mod_folio(folio, NR_DIRTIED, nr);
>>>
>>> Hi Ye, thank you for the patch,
>>>
>>> In addition to what Matthew has pointed out, I also wanted to note that this
>>> substitution isn't trivial; there are differences between the __ prefixed
>>> version of node_stat_mod_folio and the one without. Even though the correctness
>>> of the two versions might be the same, I think that a change like this should
>>> be supplemented by a description of what side effects this change has
>>> (i.e. introducing additional overhead from the cmpxchg loop).
>>>
>>> Thank you, I hope you have a great day!
>>> Joshua
>>
>> Thank you for your review, Joshua. Regarding the difference between
>> __node_stat_mod_folio and node_stat_mod_folio: in the current implementation,
>> both functions ultimately use __mod_node_page_state, as mod_node_page_state
>> is defined as __mod_node_page_state. There is no functional difference
>> between them in terms of atomicity or overhead. The __ prefixed versions
>> were wrappers that are now unused, which is why we're removing them.
> 
> Hello Ye,
> 
> Thanks for the quick response. However, I'm not sure that's true.
> For #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CMPXCHG_LOCAL in mm/vmstat.c, I can see that
> mod_node_page_state calls mod_node_state, which includes the cmpxchg loop.
> I think many users enalbe this config, including x86. IMHO, we should document
> this effect of the changes.
> 
> Thank you, I hope you have a great day!
> Joshua

Thank you for your review, Joshua. You are correct that there is a difference.
The __node_stat_mod_folio call goes directly to __mod_node_page_state, which
assumes the caller already has the necessary serialization. By contrast,
node_stat_mod_folio goes through mod_node_page_state, which on systems with
CONFIG_HAVE_CMPXCHG_LOCAL uses a this_cpu_try_cmpxchg() loop and on other
systems serializes via local_irq_save/restore.

That means the wrapper removal is not purely cosmetic: it changes the
update path from a direct per-cpu diff update to a serializing update
path, and therefore incurs extra overhead.

-- 
Thanks,
Ye Liu


  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-15  5:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-14  9:15 [PATCH 0/4] mm/vmstat: simplify folio stat APIs Ye Liu
2026-04-14  9:15 ` [PATCH 1/4] mm/vmstat: use node_stat_add_folio/sub_folio for folio_nr_pages operations Ye Liu
2026-04-14 17:52   ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-15  0:48     ` Ye Liu
2026-04-14  9:15 ` [PATCH 2/4] mm/vmstat: use zone_stat_add_folio/sub_folio " Ye Liu
2026-04-14  9:15 ` [PATCH 3/4] mm/vmstat: remove unused __node_stat_* wrappers Ye Liu
2026-04-14 14:59   ` Joshua Hahn
2026-04-15  0:50     ` Ye Liu
2026-04-15  2:29       ` Joshua Hahn
2026-04-15  5:51         ` Ye Liu [this message]
2026-04-14  9:15 ` [PATCH 4/4] mm/vmstat: remove unused __zone_stat_* wrappers Ye Liu
2026-04-14 13:18 ` [PATCH 0/4] mm/vmstat: simplify folio stat APIs Matthew Wilcox
2026-04-15  0:47   ` Ye Liu
2026-04-15  3:59     ` Matthew Wilcox
2026-04-15  5:54       ` Ye Liu

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=c55c49d7-642b-4b99-a2c7-053cb88541d0@linux.dev \
    --to=ye.liu@linux.dev \
    --cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=liuye@kylinos.cn \
    --cc=ljs@kernel.org \
    --cc=mhocko@suse.com \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=surenb@google.com \
    --cc=vbabka@kernel.org \
    --cc=willy@infradead.org \
    /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