Linux kernel -stable discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>,
	"David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@kernel.org>,
	Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
	Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>,
	Liam Howlett <liam.howlett@oracle.com>,
	Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
	Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>,
	Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 6.18.y] mm/huge_memory: merge uniform_split_supported() and non_uniform_split_supported()
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2025 21:48:31 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251230024831.1972219-1-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2025122925-victory-numeral-2346@gregkh>

From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>

[ Upstream commit 8a0e4bdddd1c998b894d879a1d22f1e745606215 ]

uniform_split_supported() and non_uniform_split_supported() share
significantly similar logic.

The only functional difference is that uniform_split_supported() includes
an additional check on the requested @new_order.

The reason for this check comes from the following two aspects:

  * some file system or swap cache just supports order-0 folio
  * the behavioral difference between uniform/non-uniform split

The behavioral difference between uniform split and non-uniform:

  * uniform split splits folio directly to @new_order
  * non-uniform split creates after-split folios with orders from
    folio_order(folio) - 1 to new_order.

This means for non-uniform split or !new_order split we should check the
file system and swap cache respectively.

This commit unifies the logic and merge the two functions into a single
combined helper, removing redundant code and simplifying the split
support checking mechanism.

Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20251106034155.21398-3-richard.weiyang@gmail.com
Fixes: c010d47f107f ("mm: thp: split huge page to any lower order pages")
Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: Zi Yan <ziy@nvidia.com>
Cc: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@kernel.org>
Cc: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Barry Song <baohua@kernel.org>
Cc: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
Cc: Lance Yang <lance.yang@linux.dev>
Cc: Liam Howlett <liam.howlett@oracle.com>
Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>
Cc: Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com>
Cc: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
[ split_type => uniform_split and replaced SPLIT_TYPE_NON_UNIFORM checks ]
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
 include/linux/huge_mm.h |  8 ++---
 mm/huge_memory.c        | 71 +++++++++++++++++------------------------
 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/huge_mm.h b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
index 71ac78b9f834..240cbc676480 100644
--- a/include/linux/huge_mm.h
+++ b/include/linux/huge_mm.h
@@ -369,10 +369,8 @@ int split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(struct page *page, struct list_head *list,
 		unsigned int new_order);
 int min_order_for_split(struct folio *folio);
 int split_folio_to_list(struct folio *folio, struct list_head *list);
-bool uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
-		bool warns);
-bool non_uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
-		bool warns);
+bool folio_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
+		bool uniform_split, bool warns);
 int folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order, struct page *page,
 		struct list_head *list);
 /*
@@ -392,7 +390,7 @@ int folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order, struct page *page,
 static inline int try_folio_split_to_order(struct folio *folio,
 		struct page *page, unsigned int new_order)
 {
-	if (!non_uniform_split_supported(folio, new_order, /* warns= */ false))
+	if (!folio_split_supported(folio, new_order, false, /* warns= */ false))
 		return split_huge_page_to_list_to_order(&folio->page, NULL,
 				new_order);
 	return folio_split(folio, new_order, page, NULL);
diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index 6cba1cb14b23..7a74198f05c6 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -3515,8 +3515,8 @@ static int __split_unmapped_folio(struct folio *folio, int new_order,
 	return ret;
 }
 
-bool non_uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
-		bool warns)
+bool folio_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
+		bool uniform_split, bool warns)
 {
 	if (folio_test_anon(folio)) {
 		/* order-1 is not supported for anonymous THP. */
@@ -3524,48 +3524,41 @@ bool non_uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
 				"Cannot split to order-1 folio");
 		if (new_order == 1)
 			return false;
-	} else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS) &&
-	    !mapping_large_folio_support(folio->mapping)) {
-		/*
-		 * No split if the file system does not support large folio.
-		 * Note that we might still have THPs in such mappings due to
-		 * CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS. But in that case, the mapping
-		 * does not actually support large folios properly.
-		 */
-		VM_WARN_ONCE(warns,
-			"Cannot split file folio to non-0 order");
-		return false;
-	}
-
-	/* Only swapping a whole PMD-mapped folio is supported */
-	if (folio_test_swapcache(folio)) {
-		VM_WARN_ONCE(warns,
-			"Cannot split swapcache folio to non-0 order");
-		return false;
-	}
-
-	return true;
-}
-
-/* See comments in non_uniform_split_supported() */
-bool uniform_split_supported(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
-		bool warns)
-{
-	if (folio_test_anon(folio)) {
-		VM_WARN_ONCE(warns && new_order == 1,
-				"Cannot split to order-1 folio");
-		if (new_order == 1)
-			return false;
-	} else  if (new_order) {
+	} else if (!uniform_split || new_order) {
 		if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS) &&
 		    !mapping_large_folio_support(folio->mapping)) {
+			/*
+			 * We can always split a folio down to a single page
+			 * (new_order == 0) uniformly.
+			 *
+			 * For any other scenario
+			 *   a) uniform split targeting a large folio
+			 *      (new_order > 0)
+			 *   b) any non-uniform split
+			 * we must confirm that the file system supports large
+			 * folios.
+			 *
+			 * Note that we might still have THPs in such
+			 * mappings, which is created from khugepaged when
+			 * CONFIG_READ_ONLY_THP_FOR_FS is enabled. But in that
+			 * case, the mapping does not actually support large
+			 * folios properly.
+			 */
 			VM_WARN_ONCE(warns,
 				"Cannot split file folio to non-0 order");
 			return false;
 		}
 	}
 
-	if (new_order && folio_test_swapcache(folio)) {
+	/*
+	 * swapcache folio could only be split to order 0
+	 *
+	 * non-uniform split creates after-split folios with orders from
+	 * folio_order(folio) - 1 to new_order, making it not suitable for any
+	 * swapcache folio split. Only uniform split to order-0 can be used
+	 * here.
+	 */
+	if ((!uniform_split || new_order) && folio_test_swapcache(folio)) {
 		VM_WARN_ONCE(warns,
 			"Cannot split swapcache folio to non-0 order");
 		return false;
@@ -3632,11 +3625,7 @@ static int __folio_split(struct folio *folio, unsigned int new_order,
 	if (new_order >= folio_order(folio))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
-	if (uniform_split && !uniform_split_supported(folio, new_order, true))
-		return -EINVAL;
-
-	if (!uniform_split &&
-	    !non_uniform_split_supported(folio, new_order, true))
+	if (!folio_split_supported(folio, new_order, uniform_split, /* warn = */ true))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	is_hzp = is_huge_zero_folio(folio);
-- 
2.51.0


  reply	other threads:[~2025-12-30  2:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-12-29 12:33 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] mm/huge_memory: merge uniform_split_supported() and" failed to apply to 6.18-stable tree gregkh
2025-12-30  2:48 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
2025-12-30  3:11 ` Wei Yang
2026-01-02 12:24   ` Greg KH
2026-01-03  1:32     ` Wei Yang

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=20251230024831.1972219-1-sashal@kernel.org \
    --to=sashal@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=baohua@kernel.org \
    --cc=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
    --cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
    --cc=liam.howlett@oracle.com \
    --cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
    --cc=npache@redhat.com \
    --cc=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
    --cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --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