From: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
To: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org, Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>,
Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>,
Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@oracle.com>,
Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>,
Liam Howlett <liam.howlett@oracle.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6.18.y 2/6] mm: thp: use folio_batch to handle THP splitting in deferred_split_scan()
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 12:28:57 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <07ec4d72-eb75-8b75-bbeb-88172af0567e@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260903182650.1451393-2-sashal@kernel.org>
On Thu, 3 Sep 2026, Sasha Levin wrote:
> From: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
>
> [ Upstream commit 776bde7caf80f6af72b087cafe7d9f607b14716d ]
>
> The maintenance of the folio->_deferred_list is intricate because it's
> reused in a local list.
>
> Here are some peculiarities:
>
> 1) When a folio is removed from its split queue and added to a local
> on-stack list in deferred_split_scan(), the ->split_queue_len isn't
> updated, leading to an inconsistency between it and the actual
> number of folios in the split queue.
>
> 2) When the folio is split via split_folio() later, it's removed from
> the local list while holding the split queue lock. At this time,
> the lock is not needed as it is not protecting anything.
>
> 3) To handle the race condition with a third-party freeing or migrating
> the preceding folio, we must ensure there's always one safe (with
> raised refcount) folio before by delaying its folio_put(). More
> details can be found in commit e66f3185fa04 ("mm/thp: fix deferred
> split queue not partially_mapped"). It's rather tricky.
>
> We can use the folio_batch infrastructure to handle this clearly. In this
> case, ->split_queue_len will be consistent with the real number of folios
> in the split queue. If list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list) returns false,
> it's clear the folio must be in its split queue (not in a local list
> anymore).
>
> In the future, we will reparent LRU folios during memcg offline to
> eliminate dying memory cgroups, which requires reparenting the split queue
> to its parent first. So this patch prepares for using
> folio_split_queue_lock_irqsave() as the memcg may change then.
>
> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/59cb6b6fb5ffcff9d23b81890b252960139ad8e7.1762762324.git.zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com
> Signed-off-by: Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com>
> Signed-off-by: Qi Zheng <zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com>
> Reviewed-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> Acked-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
> Reviewed-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
> Reviewed-by: Harry Yoo <harry.yoo@oracle.com>
> Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
> Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
> Cc: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
> Cc: Hugh Dickins <hughd@google.com>
> Cc: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Cc: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
> Cc: Liam Howlett <liam.howlett@oracle.com>
> Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>
> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> Cc: Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>
> Cc: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
> Cc: Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>
> Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Stable-dep-of: c299a2285d9d ("mm/huge_memory: use folio's memcg inside __folio_split()")
> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Oh dear, more of these Stable-dep-ofs. I just happened to be Cc'ed on
this one, and after commenting on the pincount ones, I'd better comment
on this too: we definitely want Zi Yan's XA_FLAGS_ACCOUNT fix, but
deferred split queue is tricky: so I'd judge that this should not
go forward without explicit Acks from... whoever knows best.
Hugh
> ---
> mm/huge_memory.c | 130 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
> index 11a58a93f361b..27d97afd22be1 100644
> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
> @@ -3686,19 +3686,21 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
> bool is_anon = folio_test_anon(folio);
> struct address_space *mapping = NULL;
> struct anon_vma *anon_vma = NULL;
> - int order = folio_order(folio);
> + int old_order = folio_order(folio);
> struct folio *new_folio, *next;
> + int extra_pins;
> int nr_shmem_dropped = 0;
> - int remap_flags = 0;
> - int extra_pins, ret;
> - pgoff_t end;
> - bool is_hzp;
> + enum ttu_flags ttu_flags = 0;
> + pgoff_t end = 0;
> + int ret;
>
> VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_FOLIO(!folio_test_locked(folio), folio);
> VM_WARN_ON_ONCE_FOLIO(!folio_test_large(folio), folio);
>
> - if (folio != page_folio(split_at) || folio != page_folio(lock_at))
> - return -EINVAL;
> + if (folio != page_folio(split_at) || folio != page_folio(lock_at)) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto out;
> + }
>
> /*
> * Folios that just got truncated cannot get split. Signal to the
> @@ -3710,14 +3712,12 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
> if (!is_anon && !folio->mapping)
> return -EBUSY;
>
> - if (new_order >= folio_order(folio))
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> - if (!folio_split_supported(folio, new_order, uniform_split, /* warn = */ true))
> - return -EINVAL;
> + if (new_order >= old_order) {
> + ret = -EINVAL;
> + goto out;
> + }
>
> - is_hzp = is_huge_zero_folio(folio);
> - if (is_hzp) {
> + if (is_huge_zero_folio(folio)) {
> pr_warn_ratelimited("Called split_huge_page for huge zero page\n");
> return -EBUSY;
> }
> @@ -3725,6 +3725,13 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
> if (folio_test_writeback(folio))
> return -EBUSY;
>
> + ret = folio_split_supported(folio, new_order, uniform_split,
> + /* warns = */ false) ? 0 : -EINVAL;
> + if (ret) {
> + VM_WARN_ONCE(ret == -EINVAL, "Tried to split an unsplittable folio");
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> if (is_anon) {
> /*
> * The caller does not necessarily hold an mmap_lock that would
> @@ -3817,21 +3824,22 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
> struct lruvec *lruvec;
> int expected_refs;
>
> - if (folio_order(folio) > 1 &&
> - !list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list)) {
> - ds_queue->split_queue_len--;
> + if (folio_order(folio) > 1) {
> + if (!list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list)) {
> + ds_queue->split_queue_len--;
> + /*
> + * Reinitialize page_deferred_list after removing the
> + * page from the split_queue, otherwise a subsequent
> + * split will see list corruption when checking the
> + * page_deferred_list.
> + */
> + list_del_init(&folio->_deferred_list);
> + }
> if (folio_test_partially_mapped(folio)) {
> folio_clear_partially_mapped(folio);
> mod_mthp_stat(folio_order(folio),
> MTHP_STAT_NR_ANON_PARTIALLY_MAPPED, -1);
> }
> - /*
> - * Reinitialize page_deferred_list after removing the
> - * page from the split_queue, otherwise a subsequent
> - * split will see list corruption when checking the
> - * page_deferred_list.
> - */
> - list_del_init(&folio->_deferred_list);
> }
> split_queue_unlock(ds_queue);
> if (mapping) {
> @@ -3941,8 +3949,8 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
> shmem_uncharge(mapping->host, nr_shmem_dropped);
>
> if (!ret && is_anon)
> - remap_flags = RMP_USE_SHARED_ZEROPAGE;
> - remap_page(folio, 1 << order, remap_flags);
> + ttu_flags = (enum ttu_flags)RMP_USE_SHARED_ZEROPAGE;
> + remap_page(folio, 1 << old_order, ttu_flags);
>
> /*
> * Drop the mapping while the inode is still pinned. @folio stays
> @@ -3985,9 +3993,9 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
> i_mmap_unlock_read(mapping);
> out:
> xas_destroy(&xas);
> - if (order == HPAGE_PMD_ORDER)
> + if (old_order == HPAGE_PMD_ORDER)
> count_vm_event(!ret ? THP_SPLIT_PAGE : THP_SPLIT_PAGE_FAILED);
> - count_mthp_stat(order, !ret ? MTHP_STAT_SPLIT : MTHP_STAT_SPLIT_FAILED);
> + count_mthp_stat(old_order, !ret ? MTHP_STAT_SPLIT : MTHP_STAT_SPLIT_FAILED);
> return ret;
> }
>
> @@ -4230,35 +4238,40 @@ static unsigned long deferred_split_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
> {
> struct deferred_split *ds_queue;
> unsigned long flags;
> - LIST_HEAD(list);
> - struct folio *folio, *next, *prev = NULL;
> - int split = 0, removed = 0;
> + struct folio *folio, *next;
> + int split = 0, i;
> + struct folio_batch fbatch;
> +
> + folio_batch_init(&fbatch);
>
> +retry:
> ds_queue = split_queue_lock_irqsave(sc->nid, sc->memcg, &flags);
> /* Take pin on all head pages to avoid freeing them under us */
> list_for_each_entry_safe(folio, next, &ds_queue->split_queue,
> _deferred_list) {
> if (folio_try_get(folio)) {
> - list_move(&folio->_deferred_list, &list);
> - } else {
> + folio_batch_add(&fbatch, folio);
> + } else if (folio_test_partially_mapped(folio)) {
> /* We lost race with folio_put() */
> - if (folio_test_partially_mapped(folio)) {
> - folio_clear_partially_mapped(folio);
> - mod_mthp_stat(folio_order(folio),
> - MTHP_STAT_NR_ANON_PARTIALLY_MAPPED, -1);
> - }
> - list_del_init(&folio->_deferred_list);
> - ds_queue->split_queue_len--;
> + folio_clear_partially_mapped(folio);
> + mod_mthp_stat(folio_order(folio),
> + MTHP_STAT_NR_ANON_PARTIALLY_MAPPED, -1);
> }
> + list_del_init(&folio->_deferred_list);
> + ds_queue->split_queue_len--;
> if (!--sc->nr_to_scan)
> break;
> + if (!folio_batch_space(&fbatch))
> + break;
> }
> split_queue_unlock_irqrestore(ds_queue, flags);
>
> - list_for_each_entry_safe(folio, next, &list, _deferred_list) {
> + for (i = 0; i < folio_batch_count(&fbatch); i++) {
> bool did_split = false;
> bool underused = false;
> + struct deferred_split *fqueue;
>
> + folio = fbatch.folios[i];
> if (!folio_test_partially_mapped(folio)) {
> /*
> * See try_to_map_unused_to_zeropage(): we cannot
> @@ -4281,38 +4294,27 @@ static unsigned long deferred_split_scan(struct shrinker *shrink,
> }
> folio_unlock(folio);
> next:
> + if (did_split || !folio_test_partially_mapped(folio))
> + continue;
> /*
> - * split_folio() removes folio from list on success.
> * Only add back to the queue if folio is partially mapped.
> * If thp_underused returns false, or if split_folio fails
> * in the case it was underused, then consider it used and
> * don't add it back to split_queue.
> */
> - if (did_split) {
> - ; /* folio already removed from list */
> - } else if (!folio_test_partially_mapped(folio)) {
> - list_del_init(&folio->_deferred_list);
> - removed++;
> - } else {
> - /*
> - * That unlocked list_del_init() above would be unsafe,
> - * unless its folio is separated from any earlier folios
> - * left on the list (which may be concurrently unqueued)
> - * by one safe folio with refcount still raised.
> - */
> - swap(folio, prev);
> + fqueue = folio_split_queue_lock_irqsave(folio, &flags);
> + if (list_empty(&folio->_deferred_list)) {
> + list_add_tail(&folio->_deferred_list, &fqueue->split_queue);
> + fqueue->split_queue_len++;
> }
> - if (folio)
> - folio_put(folio);
> + split_queue_unlock_irqrestore(fqueue, flags);
> }
> + folios_put(&fbatch);
>
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock, flags);
> - list_splice_tail(&list, &ds_queue->split_queue);
> - ds_queue->split_queue_len -= removed;
> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ds_queue->split_queue_lock, flags);
> -
> - if (prev)
> - folio_put(prev);
> + if (sc->nr_to_scan && !list_empty(&ds_queue->split_queue)) {
> + cond_resched();
> + goto retry;
> + }
>
> /*
> * Stop shrinker if we didn't split any page, but the queue is empty.
> --
> 2.53.0
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-03 19:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-03 10:46 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] mm/huge_memory: use folio's memcg inside __folio_split()" failed to apply to 6.18-stable tree gregkh
2026-09-03 18:26 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 1/6] mm: thp: introduce folio_split_queue_lock and its variants Sasha Levin
2026-09-03 18:26 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 2/6] mm: thp: use folio_batch to handle THP splitting in deferred_split_scan() Sasha Levin
2026-09-03 19:28 ` Hugh Dickins [this message]
2026-09-03 18:26 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 3/6] mm/huge_memory: change folio_split_supported() to folio_check_splittable() Sasha Levin
2026-09-03 18:26 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 4/6] mm/huge_memory: replace can_split_folio() with direct refcount calculation Sasha Levin
2026-09-03 18:26 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 5/6] migrate: replace RMP_ flags with TTU_ flags Sasha Levin
2026-09-03 18:26 ` [PATCH 6.18.y 6/6] mm/huge_memory: use folio's memcg inside __folio_split() Sasha Levin
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=07ec4d72-eb75-8b75-bbeb-88172af0567e@google.com \
--to=hughd@google.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=harry.yoo@oracle.com \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=liam.howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=muchun.song@linux.dev \
--cc=npache@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=shakeel.butt@linux.dev \
--cc=songmuchun@bytedance.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/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