[RFC] memcg: Convert mc_target.page to mc_target.folio

[RFC] memcg: Convert mc_target.page to mc_target.folio

[Matthew Wilcox]

This is a fairly mechanical change to convert mc_target.page to
mc_target.folio.  This is a prerequisite for converting
find_get_incore_page() to find_get_incore_folio().  But I'm not
convinced it's right, and I'm not convinced the existing code is
quite right either.

In particular, the code in hunk @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ needs
careful review.  There are also assumptions in here that a memory
allocation is never larger than a PMD, which is true today, but I've
been asked about larger allocations.


diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index ae66972a0331..a424df06b3e1 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -5461,42 +5461,44 @@ static int mem_cgroup_do_precharge(unsigned long count)
 }
 
 union mc_target {
-	struct page	*page;
+	struct folio	*folio;
 	swp_entry_t	ent;
 };
 
 enum mc_target_type {
 	MC_TARGET_NONE = 0,
-	MC_TARGET_PAGE,
+	MC_TARGET_FOLIO,
 	MC_TARGET_SWAP,
 	MC_TARGET_DEVICE,
 };
 
-static struct page *mc_handle_present_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+static struct folio *mc_handle_present_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 						unsigned long addr, pte_t ptent)
 {
 	struct page *page = vm_normal_page(vma, addr, ptent);
+	struct folio *folio;
 
 	if (!page || !page_mapped(page))
 		return NULL;
-	if (PageAnon(page)) {
+	folio = page_folio(page);
+	if (folio_test_anon(folio)) {
 		if (!(mc.flags & MOVE_ANON))
 			return NULL;
 	} else {
 		if (!(mc.flags & MOVE_FILE))
 			return NULL;
 	}
-	if (!get_page_unless_zero(page))
+	if (!folio_try_get(folio))
 		return NULL;
 
-	return page;
+	return folio;
 }
 
 #if defined(CONFIG_SWAP) || defined(CONFIG_DEVICE_PRIVATE)
-static struct page *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+static struct folio *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 			pte_t ptent, swp_entry_t *entry)
 {
-	struct page *page = NULL;
+	struct folio *folio;
 	swp_entry_t ent = pte_to_swp_entry(ptent);
 
 	if (!(mc.flags & MOVE_ANON))
@@ -5507,10 +5509,12 @@ static struct page *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 	 * stored as special swap entries in the page table.
 	 */
 	if (is_device_private_entry(ent)) {
-		page = pfn_swap_entry_to_page(ent);
-		if (!get_page_unless_zero(page))
+		struct page *page = pfn_swap_entry_to_page(ent);
+
+		folio = page_folio(page);
+		if (!folio_try_get(folio))
 			return NULL;
-		return page;
+		return folio;
 	}
 
 	if (non_swap_entry(ent))
@@ -5518,22 +5522,22 @@ static struct page *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 
 	/*
 	 * Because lookup_swap_cache() updates some statistics counter,
-	 * we call find_get_page() with swapper_space directly.
+	 * we call filemap_get_folio() with swapper_space directly.
 	 */
-	page = find_get_page(swap_address_space(ent), swp_offset(ent));
+	folio = filemap_get_folio(swap_address_space(ent), swp_offset(ent));
 	entry->val = ent.val;
 
-	return page;
+	return folio;
 }
 #else
-static struct page *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+static struct folio *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 			pte_t ptent, swp_entry_t *entry)
 {
 	return NULL;
 }
 #endif
 
-static struct page *mc_handle_file_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+static struct folio *mc_handle_file_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 			unsigned long addr, pte_t ptent)
 {
 	if (!vma->vm_file) /* anonymous vma */
@@ -5543,28 +5547,28 @@ static struct page *mc_handle_file_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 
 	/* page is moved even if it's not RSS of this task(page-faulted). */
 	/* shmem/tmpfs may report page out on swap: account for that too. */
-	return find_get_incore_page(vma->vm_file->f_mapping,
-			linear_page_index(vma, addr));
+	return page_folio(find_get_incore_page(vma->vm_file->f_mapping,
+			linear_page_index(vma, addr)));
 }
 
 /**
- * mem_cgroup_move_account - move account of the page
- * @page: the page
- * @compound: charge the page as compound or small page
- * @from: mem_cgroup which the page is moved from.
- * @to:	mem_cgroup which the page is moved to. @from != @to.
+ * mem_cgroup_move_account - move account of the folio
+ * @folio: The folio.
+ * @compound: Charge the folio as large or small.
+ * @from: mem_cgroup which the folio is moved from.
+ * @to:	mem_cgroup which the folio is moved to. @from != @to.
  *
- * The caller must make sure the page is not on LRU (isolate_page() is useful.)
+ * The caller must make sure the folio is not on LRU (folio_isolate_lru()
+ * is useful.)
  *
  * This function doesn't do "charge" to new cgroup and doesn't do "uncharge"
  * from old cgroup.
  */
-static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
+static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct folio *folio,
 				   bool compound,
 				   struct mem_cgroup *from,
 				   struct mem_cgroup *to)
 {
-	struct folio *folio = page_folio(page);
 	struct lruvec *from_vec, *to_vec;
 	struct pglist_data *pgdat;
 	unsigned int nr_pages = compound ? folio_nr_pages(folio) : 1;
@@ -5576,7 +5580,7 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
 
 	/*
 	 * Prevent mem_cgroup_migrate() from looking at
-	 * page's memory cgroup of its source page while we change it.
+	 * folio's memory cgroup of its source folio while we change it.
 	 */
 	ret = -EBUSY;
 	if (!folio_trylock(folio))
@@ -5637,13 +5641,13 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
 	/*
 	 * All state has been migrated, let's switch to the new memcg.
 	 *
-	 * It is safe to change page's memcg here because the page
+	 * It is safe to change folio's memcg here because the folio
 	 * is referenced, charged, isolated, and locked: we can't race
 	 * with (un)charging, migration, LRU putback, or anything else
-	 * that would rely on a stable page's memory cgroup.
+	 * that would rely on a stable folio's memory cgroup.
 	 *
-	 * Note that lock_page_memcg is a memcg lock, not a page lock,
-	 * to save space. As soon as we switch page's memory cgroup to a
+	 * Note that folio_memcg_lock is a memcg lock, not a folio lock,
+	 * to save space. As soon as we switch folio's memory cgroup to a
 	 * new memcg that isn't locked, the above state can change
 	 * concurrently again. Make sure we're truly done with it.
 	 */
@@ -5676,21 +5680,21 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
  * @vma: the vma the pte to be checked belongs
  * @addr: the address corresponding to the pte to be checked
  * @ptent: the pte to be checked
- * @target: the pointer the target page or swap ent will be stored(can be NULL)
+ * @target: the pointer the target folio or swap ent will be stored(can be NULL)
  *
  * Returns
  *   0(MC_TARGET_NONE): if the pte is not a target for move charge.
- *   1(MC_TARGET_PAGE): if the page corresponding to this pte is a target for
- *     move charge. if @target is not NULL, the page is stored in target->page
+ *   1(MC_TARGET_FOLIO): if the folio corresponding to this pte is a target for
+ *     move charge. if @target is not NULL, the folio is stored in target->folio
  *     with extra refcnt got(Callers should handle it).
  *   2(MC_TARGET_SWAP): if the swap entry corresponding to this pte is a
  *     target for charge migration. if @target is not NULL, the entry is stored
  *     in target->ent.
- *   3(MC_TARGET_DEVICE): like MC_TARGET_PAGE  but page is device memory and
+ *   3(MC_TARGET_DEVICE): like MC_TARGET_FOLIO  but folio is device memory and
  *   thus not on the lru.
- *     For now we such page is charge like a regular page would be as for all
+ *     For now such folio is chargd like a regular folio would be as for all
  *     intent and purposes it is just special memory taking the place of a
- *     regular page.
+ *     regular folio.
  *
  *     See Documentations/vm/hmm.txt and include/linux/hmm.h
  *
@@ -5700,41 +5704,41 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
 static enum mc_target_type get_mctgt_type(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 		unsigned long addr, pte_t ptent, union mc_target *target)
 {
-	struct page *page = NULL;
+	struct folio *folio = NULL;
 	enum mc_target_type ret = MC_TARGET_NONE;
 	swp_entry_t ent = { .val = 0 };
 
 	if (pte_present(ptent))
-		page = mc_handle_present_pte(vma, addr, ptent);
+		folio = mc_handle_present_pte(vma, addr, ptent);
 	else if (is_swap_pte(ptent))
-		page = mc_handle_swap_pte(vma, ptent, &ent);
+		folio = mc_handle_swap_pte(vma, ptent, &ent);
 	else if (pte_none(ptent))
-		page = mc_handle_file_pte(vma, addr, ptent);
+		folio = mc_handle_file_pte(vma, addr, ptent);
 
-	if (!page && !ent.val)
+	if (!folio && !ent.val)
 		return ret;
-	if (page) {
+	if (folio) {
 		/*
 		 * Do only loose check w/o serialization.
-		 * mem_cgroup_move_account() checks the page is valid or
+		 * mem_cgroup_move_account() checks the folio is valid or
 		 * not under LRU exclusion.
 		 */
-		if (page_memcg(page) == mc.from) {
-			ret = MC_TARGET_PAGE;
-			if (is_device_private_page(page) ||
-			    is_device_coherent_page(page))
+		if (folio_memcg(folio) == mc.from) {
+			ret = MC_TARGET_FOLIO;
+			if (folio_is_device_private(folio) ||
+			    folio_is_device_coherent(folio))
 				ret = MC_TARGET_DEVICE;
 			if (target)
-				target->page = page;
+				target->folio = folio;
 		}
 		if (!ret || !target)
-			put_page(page);
+			folio_put(folio);
 	}
 	/*
-	 * There is a swap entry and a page doesn't exist or isn't charged.
+	 * There is a swap entry and a folio doesn't exist or isn't charged.
 	 * But we cannot move a tail-page in a THP.
 	 */
-	if (ent.val && !ret && (!page || !PageTransCompound(page)) &&
+	if (ent.val && !ret && (!folio || !folio_test_large(folio)) &&
 	    mem_cgroup_id(mc.from) == lookup_swap_cgroup_id(ent)) {
 		ret = MC_TARGET_SWAP;
 		if (target)
@@ -5745,14 +5749,14 @@ static enum mc_target_type get_mctgt_type(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
 /*
- * We don't consider PMD mapped swapping or file mapped pages because THP does
+ * We don't consider PMD mapped swapping or file mapped folios because THP does
  * not support them for now.
  * Caller should make sure that pmd_trans_huge(pmd) is true.
  */
 static enum mc_target_type get_mctgt_type_thp(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 		unsigned long addr, pmd_t pmd, union mc_target *target)
 {
-	struct page *page = NULL;
+	struct folio *folio = NULL;
 	enum mc_target_type ret = MC_TARGET_NONE;
 
 	if (unlikely(is_swap_pmd(pmd))) {
@@ -5760,15 +5764,15 @@ static enum mc_target_type get_mctgt_type_thp(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 				  !is_pmd_migration_entry(pmd));
 		return ret;
 	}
-	page = pmd_page(pmd);
-	VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!page || !PageHead(page), page);
+	folio = page_folio(pmd_page(pmd));
+	VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(!folio || !folio_test_large(folio), folio);
 	if (!(mc.flags & MOVE_ANON))
 		return ret;
-	if (page_memcg(page) == mc.from) {
-		ret = MC_TARGET_PAGE;
+	if (folio_memcg(folio) == mc.from) {
+		ret = MC_TARGET_FOLIO;
 		if (target) {
-			get_page(page);
-			target->page = page;
+			folio_get(folio);
+			target->folio = folio;
 		}
 	}
 	return ret;
@@ -5796,7 +5800,8 @@ static int mem_cgroup_count_precharge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
 		 * support transparent huge page with MEMORY_DEVICE_PRIVATE but
 		 * this might change.
 		 */
-		if (get_mctgt_type_thp(vma, addr, *pmd, NULL) == MC_TARGET_PAGE)
+		if (get_mctgt_type_thp(vma, addr, *pmd, NULL) ==
+				MC_TARGET_FOLIO)
 			mc.precharge += HPAGE_PMD_NR;
 		spin_unlock(ptl);
 		return 0;
@@ -5987,7 +5992,7 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
 	spinlock_t *ptl;
 	enum mc_target_type target_type;
 	union mc_target target;
-	struct page *page;
+	struct folio *folio;
 
 	ptl = pmd_trans_huge_lock(pmd, vma);
 	if (ptl) {
@@ -5996,25 +6001,25 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
 			return 0;
 		}
 		target_type = get_mctgt_type_thp(vma, addr, *pmd, &target);
-		if (target_type == MC_TARGET_PAGE) {
-			page = target.page;
-			if (!isolate_lru_page(page)) {
-				if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(page, true,
+		if (target_type == MC_TARGET_FOLIO) {
+			folio = target.folio;
+			if (!folio_isolate_lru(folio)) {
+				if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, true,
 							     mc.from, mc.to)) {
 					mc.precharge -= HPAGE_PMD_NR;
 					mc.moved_charge += HPAGE_PMD_NR;
 				}
-				putback_lru_page(page);
+				folio_putback_lru(folio);
 			}
-			put_page(page);
+			folio_put(folio);
 		} else if (target_type == MC_TARGET_DEVICE) {
-			page = target.page;
-			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(page, true,
+			folio = target.folio;
+			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, true,
 						     mc.from, mc.to)) {
 				mc.precharge -= HPAGE_PMD_NR;
 				mc.moved_charge += HPAGE_PMD_NR;
 			}
-			put_page(page);
+			folio_put(folio);
 		}
 		spin_unlock(ptl);
 		return 0;
@@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
 		case MC_TARGET_DEVICE:
 			device = true;
 			fallthrough;
-		case MC_TARGET_PAGE:
-			page = target.page;
+		case MC_TARGET_FOLIO:
+			folio = target.folio;
 			/*
-			 * We can have a part of the split pmd here. Moving it
-			 * can be done but it would be too convoluted so simply
-			 * ignore such a partial THP and keep it in original
-			 * memcg. There should be somebody mapping the head.
+			 * Is bailing out here with a large folio still the
+			 * right thing to do?  Unclear.
 			 */
-			if (PageTransCompound(page))
+			if (folio_test_large(folio))
 				goto put;
-			if (!device && isolate_lru_page(page))
+			if (!device && folio_isolate_lru(folio))
 				goto put;
-			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(page, false,
+			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, false,
 						mc.from, mc.to)) {
 				mc.precharge--;
 				/* we uncharge from mc.from later. */
 				mc.moved_charge++;
 			}
 			if (!device)
-				putback_lru_page(page);
-put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the page */
-			put_page(page);
+				folio_putback_lru(folio);
+put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the folio */
+			folio_put(folio);
 			break;
 		case MC_TARGET_SWAP:
 			ent = target.ent;

[RFC] memcg: Convert mc_target.page to mc_target.folio

[Matthew Wilcox]

This is a fairly mechanical change to convert mc_target.page to
mc_target.folio.  This is a prerequisite for converting
find_get_incore_page() to find_get_incore_folio().  But I'm not
convinced it's right, and I'm not convinced the existing code is
quite right either.

In particular, the code in hunk @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ needs
careful review.  There are also assumptions in here that a memory
allocation is never larger than a PMD, which is true today, but I've
been asked about larger allocations.


diff --git a/mm/memcontrol.c b/mm/memcontrol.c
index ae66972a0331..a424df06b3e1 100644
--- a/mm/memcontrol.c
+++ b/mm/memcontrol.c
@@ -5461,42 +5461,44 @@ static int mem_cgroup_do_precharge(unsigned long count)
 }
 
 union mc_target {
-	struct page	*page;
+	struct folio	*folio;
 	swp_entry_t	ent;
 };
 
 enum mc_target_type {
 	MC_TARGET_NONE = 0,
-	MC_TARGET_PAGE,
+	MC_TARGET_FOLIO,
 	MC_TARGET_SWAP,
 	MC_TARGET_DEVICE,
 };
 
-static struct page *mc_handle_present_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+static struct folio *mc_handle_present_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 						unsigned long addr, pte_t ptent)
 {
 	struct page *page = vm_normal_page(vma, addr, ptent);
+	struct folio *folio;
 
 	if (!page || !page_mapped(page))
 		return NULL;
-	if (PageAnon(page)) {
+	folio = page_folio(page);
+	if (folio_test_anon(folio)) {
 		if (!(mc.flags & MOVE_ANON))
 			return NULL;
 	} else {
 		if (!(mc.flags & MOVE_FILE))
 			return NULL;
 	}
-	if (!get_page_unless_zero(page))
+	if (!folio_try_get(folio))
 		return NULL;
 
-	return page;
+	return folio;
 }
 
 #if defined(CONFIG_SWAP) || defined(CONFIG_DEVICE_PRIVATE)
-static struct page *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+static struct folio *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 			pte_t ptent, swp_entry_t *entry)
 {
-	struct page *page = NULL;
+	struct folio *folio;
 	swp_entry_t ent = pte_to_swp_entry(ptent);
 
 	if (!(mc.flags & MOVE_ANON))
@@ -5507,10 +5509,12 @@ static struct page *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 	 * stored as special swap entries in the page table.
 	 */
 	if (is_device_private_entry(ent)) {
-		page = pfn_swap_entry_to_page(ent);
-		if (!get_page_unless_zero(page))
+		struct page *page = pfn_swap_entry_to_page(ent);
+
+		folio = page_folio(page);
+		if (!folio_try_get(folio))
 			return NULL;
-		return page;
+		return folio;
 	}
 
 	if (non_swap_entry(ent))
@@ -5518,22 +5522,22 @@ static struct page *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 
 	/*
 	 * Because lookup_swap_cache() updates some statistics counter,
-	 * we call find_get_page() with swapper_space directly.
+	 * we call filemap_get_folio() with swapper_space directly.
 	 */
-	page = find_get_page(swap_address_space(ent), swp_offset(ent));
+	folio = filemap_get_folio(swap_address_space(ent), swp_offset(ent));
 	entry->val = ent.val;
 
-	return page;
+	return folio;
 }
 #else
-static struct page *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+static struct folio *mc_handle_swap_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 			pte_t ptent, swp_entry_t *entry)
 {
 	return NULL;
 }
 #endif
 
-static struct page *mc_handle_file_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
+static struct folio *mc_handle_file_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 			unsigned long addr, pte_t ptent)
 {
 	if (!vma->vm_file) /* anonymous vma */
@@ -5543,28 +5547,28 @@ static struct page *mc_handle_file_pte(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 
 	/* page is moved even if it's not RSS of this task(page-faulted). */
 	/* shmem/tmpfs may report page out on swap: account for that too. */
-	return find_get_incore_page(vma->vm_file->f_mapping,
-			linear_page_index(vma, addr));
+	return page_folio(find_get_incore_page(vma->vm_file->f_mapping,
+			linear_page_index(vma, addr)));
 }
 
 /**
- * mem_cgroup_move_account - move account of the page
- * @page: the page
- * @compound: charge the page as compound or small page
- * @from: mem_cgroup which the page is moved from.
- * @to:	mem_cgroup which the page is moved to. @from != @to.
+ * mem_cgroup_move_account - move account of the folio
+ * @folio: The folio.
+ * @compound: Charge the folio as large or small.
+ * @from: mem_cgroup which the folio is moved from.
+ * @to:	mem_cgroup which the folio is moved to. @from != @to.
  *
- * The caller must make sure the page is not on LRU (isolate_page() is useful.)
+ * The caller must make sure the folio is not on LRU (folio_isolate_lru()
+ * is useful.)
  *
  * This function doesn't do "charge" to new cgroup and doesn't do "uncharge"
  * from old cgroup.
  */
-static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
+static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct folio *folio,
 				   bool compound,
 				   struct mem_cgroup *from,
 				   struct mem_cgroup *to)
 {
-	struct folio *folio = page_folio(page);
 	struct lruvec *from_vec, *to_vec;
 	struct pglist_data *pgdat;
 	unsigned int nr_pages = compound ? folio_nr_pages(folio) : 1;
@@ -5576,7 +5580,7 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
 
 	/*
 	 * Prevent mem_cgroup_migrate() from looking at
-	 * page's memory cgroup of its source page while we change it.
+	 * folio's memory cgroup of its source folio while we change it.
 	 */
 	ret = -EBUSY;
 	if (!folio_trylock(folio))
@@ -5637,13 +5641,13 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
 	/*
 	 * All state has been migrated, let's switch to the new memcg.
 	 *
-	 * It is safe to change page's memcg here because the page
+	 * It is safe to change folio's memcg here because the folio
 	 * is referenced, charged, isolated, and locked: we can't race
 	 * with (un)charging, migration, LRU putback, or anything else
-	 * that would rely on a stable page's memory cgroup.
+	 * that would rely on a stable folio's memory cgroup.
 	 *
-	 * Note that lock_page_memcg is a memcg lock, not a page lock,
-	 * to save space. As soon as we switch page's memory cgroup to a
+	 * Note that folio_memcg_lock is a memcg lock, not a folio lock,
+	 * to save space. As soon as we switch folio's memory cgroup to a
 	 * new memcg that isn't locked, the above state can change
 	 * concurrently again. Make sure we're truly done with it.
 	 */
@@ -5676,21 +5680,21 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
  * @vma: the vma the pte to be checked belongs
  * @addr: the address corresponding to the pte to be checked
  * @ptent: the pte to be checked
- * @target: the pointer the target page or swap ent will be stored(can be NULL)
+ * @target: the pointer the target folio or swap ent will be stored(can be NULL)
  *
  * Returns
  *   0(MC_TARGET_NONE): if the pte is not a target for move charge.
- *   1(MC_TARGET_PAGE): if the page corresponding to this pte is a target for
- *     move charge. if @target is not NULL, the page is stored in target->page
+ *   1(MC_TARGET_FOLIO): if the folio corresponding to this pte is a target for
+ *     move charge. if @target is not NULL, the folio is stored in target->folio
  *     with extra refcnt got(Callers should handle it).
  *   2(MC_TARGET_SWAP): if the swap entry corresponding to this pte is a
  *     target for charge migration. if @target is not NULL, the entry is stored
  *     in target->ent.
- *   3(MC_TARGET_DEVICE): like MC_TARGET_PAGE  but page is device memory and
+ *   3(MC_TARGET_DEVICE): like MC_TARGET_FOLIO  but folio is device memory and
  *   thus not on the lru.
- *     For now we such page is charge like a regular page would be as for all
+ *     For now such folio is chargd like a regular folio would be as for all
  *     intent and purposes it is just special memory taking the place of a
- *     regular page.
+ *     regular folio.
  *
  *     See Documentations/vm/hmm.txt and include/linux/hmm.h
  *
@@ -5700,41 +5704,41 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_account(struct page *page,
 static enum mc_target_type get_mctgt_type(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 		unsigned long addr, pte_t ptent, union mc_target *target)
 {
-	struct page *page = NULL;
+	struct folio *folio = NULL;
 	enum mc_target_type ret = MC_TARGET_NONE;
 	swp_entry_t ent = { .val = 0 };
 
 	if (pte_present(ptent))
-		page = mc_handle_present_pte(vma, addr, ptent);
+		folio = mc_handle_present_pte(vma, addr, ptent);
 	else if (is_swap_pte(ptent))
-		page = mc_handle_swap_pte(vma, ptent, &ent);
+		folio = mc_handle_swap_pte(vma, ptent, &ent);
 	else if (pte_none(ptent))
-		page = mc_handle_file_pte(vma, addr, ptent);
+		folio = mc_handle_file_pte(vma, addr, ptent);
 
-	if (!page && !ent.val)
+	if (!folio && !ent.val)
 		return ret;
-	if (page) {
+	if (folio) {
 		/*
 		 * Do only loose check w/o serialization.
-		 * mem_cgroup_move_account() checks the page is valid or
+		 * mem_cgroup_move_account() checks the folio is valid or
 		 * not under LRU exclusion.
 		 */
-		if (page_memcg(page) == mc.from) {
-			ret = MC_TARGET_PAGE;
-			if (is_device_private_page(page) ||
-			    is_device_coherent_page(page))
+		if (folio_memcg(folio) == mc.from) {
+			ret = MC_TARGET_FOLIO;
+			if (folio_is_device_private(folio) ||
+			    folio_is_device_coherent(folio))
 				ret = MC_TARGET_DEVICE;
 			if (target)
-				target->page = page;
+				target->folio = folio;
 		}
 		if (!ret || !target)
-			put_page(page);
+			folio_put(folio);
 	}
 	/*
-	 * There is a swap entry and a page doesn't exist or isn't charged.
+	 * There is a swap entry and a folio doesn't exist or isn't charged.
 	 * But we cannot move a tail-page in a THP.
 	 */
-	if (ent.val && !ret && (!page || !PageTransCompound(page)) &&
+	if (ent.val && !ret && (!folio || !folio_test_large(folio)) &&
 	    mem_cgroup_id(mc.from) == lookup_swap_cgroup_id(ent)) {
 		ret = MC_TARGET_SWAP;
 		if (target)
@@ -5745,14 +5749,14 @@ static enum mc_target_type get_mctgt_type(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
 /*
- * We don't consider PMD mapped swapping or file mapped pages because THP does
+ * We don't consider PMD mapped swapping or file mapped folios because THP does
  * not support them for now.
  * Caller should make sure that pmd_trans_huge(pmd) is true.
  */
 static enum mc_target_type get_mctgt_type_thp(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 		unsigned long addr, pmd_t pmd, union mc_target *target)
 {
-	struct page *page = NULL;
+	struct folio *folio = NULL;
 	enum mc_target_type ret = MC_TARGET_NONE;
 
 	if (unlikely(is_swap_pmd(pmd))) {
@@ -5760,15 +5764,15 @@ static enum mc_target_type get_mctgt_type_thp(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 				  !is_pmd_migration_entry(pmd));
 		return ret;
 	}
-	page = pmd_page(pmd);
-	VM_BUG_ON_PAGE(!page || !PageHead(page), page);
+	folio = page_folio(pmd_page(pmd));
+	VM_BUG_ON_FOLIO(!folio || !folio_test_large(folio), folio);
 	if (!(mc.flags & MOVE_ANON))
 		return ret;
-	if (page_memcg(page) == mc.from) {
-		ret = MC_TARGET_PAGE;
+	if (folio_memcg(folio) == mc.from) {
+		ret = MC_TARGET_FOLIO;
 		if (target) {
-			get_page(page);
-			target->page = page;
+			folio_get(folio);
+			target->folio = folio;
 		}
 	}
 	return ret;
@@ -5796,7 +5800,8 @@ static int mem_cgroup_count_precharge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
 		 * support transparent huge page with MEMORY_DEVICE_PRIVATE but
 		 * this might change.
 		 */
-		if (get_mctgt_type_thp(vma, addr, *pmd, NULL) == MC_TARGET_PAGE)
+		if (get_mctgt_type_thp(vma, addr, *pmd, NULL) ==
+				MC_TARGET_FOLIO)
 			mc.precharge += HPAGE_PMD_NR;
 		spin_unlock(ptl);
 		return 0;
@@ -5987,7 +5992,7 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
 	spinlock_t *ptl;
 	enum mc_target_type target_type;
 	union mc_target target;
-	struct page *page;
+	struct folio *folio;
 
 	ptl = pmd_trans_huge_lock(pmd, vma);
 	if (ptl) {
@@ -5996,25 +6001,25 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
 			return 0;
 		}
 		target_type = get_mctgt_type_thp(vma, addr, *pmd, &target);
-		if (target_type == MC_TARGET_PAGE) {
-			page = target.page;
-			if (!isolate_lru_page(page)) {
-				if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(page, true,
+		if (target_type == MC_TARGET_FOLIO) {
+			folio = target.folio;
+			if (!folio_isolate_lru(folio)) {
+				if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, true,
 							     mc.from, mc.to)) {
 					mc.precharge -= HPAGE_PMD_NR;
 					mc.moved_charge += HPAGE_PMD_NR;
 				}
-				putback_lru_page(page);
+				folio_putback_lru(folio);
 			}
-			put_page(page);
+			folio_put(folio);
 		} else if (target_type == MC_TARGET_DEVICE) {
-			page = target.page;
-			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(page, true,
+			folio = target.folio;
+			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, true,
 						     mc.from, mc.to)) {
 				mc.precharge -= HPAGE_PMD_NR;
 				mc.moved_charge += HPAGE_PMD_NR;
 			}
-			put_page(page);
+			folio_put(folio);
 		}
 		spin_unlock(ptl);
 		return 0;
@@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
 		case MC_TARGET_DEVICE:
 			device = true;
 			fallthrough;
-		case MC_TARGET_PAGE:
-			page = target.page;
+		case MC_TARGET_FOLIO:
+			folio = target.folio;
 			/*
-			 * We can have a part of the split pmd here. Moving it
-			 * can be done but it would be too convoluted so simply
-			 * ignore such a partial THP and keep it in original
-			 * memcg. There should be somebody mapping the head.
+			 * Is bailing out here with a large folio still the
+			 * right thing to do?  Unclear.
 			 */
-			if (PageTransCompound(page))
+			if (folio_test_large(folio))
 				goto put;
-			if (!device && isolate_lru_page(page))
+			if (!device && folio_isolate_lru(folio))
 				goto put;
-			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(page, false,
+			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, false,
 						mc.from, mc.to)) {
 				mc.precharge--;
 				/* we uncharge from mc.from later. */
 				mc.moved_charge++;
 			}
 			if (!device)
-				putback_lru_page(page);
-put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the page */
-			put_page(page);
+				folio_putback_lru(folio);
+put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the folio */
+			folio_put(folio);
 			break;
 		case MC_TARGET_SWAP:
 			ent = target.ent;

Re: [RFC] memcg: Convert mc_target.page to mc_target.folio

[Michal Hocko]

On Wed 16-03-22 20:31:30, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> This is a fairly mechanical change to convert mc_target.page to
> mc_target.folio.  This is a prerequisite for converting
> find_get_incore_page() to find_get_incore_folio().  But I'm not
> convinced it's right, and I'm not convinced the existing code is
> quite right either.
> 
> In particular, the code in hunk @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ needs
> careful review.  There are also assumptions in here that a memory
> allocation is never larger than a PMD, which is true today, but I've
> been asked about larger allocations.

Could you be more specific about those usecases? Are they really
interested in supporting larger pages for the memcg migration which is
v1 only feature? Or you are interested merely to have the code more
generic?

[...]
> @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
>  		case MC_TARGET_DEVICE:
>  			device = true;
>  			fallthrough;
> -		case MC_TARGET_PAGE:
> -			page = target.page;
> +		case MC_TARGET_FOLIO:
> +			folio = target.folio;
>  			/*
> -			 * We can have a part of the split pmd here. Moving it
> -			 * can be done but it would be too convoluted so simply
> -			 * ignore such a partial THP and keep it in original
> -			 * memcg. There should be somebody mapping the head.
> +			 * Is bailing out here with a large folio still the
> +			 * right thing to do?  Unclear.
>  			 */
> -			if (PageTransCompound(page))
> +			if (folio_test_large(folio))
>  				goto put;
> -			if (!device && isolate_lru_page(page))
> +			if (!device && folio_isolate_lru(folio))
>  				goto put;
> -			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(page, false,
> +			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, false,
>  						mc.from, mc.to)) {
>  				mc.precharge--;
>  				/* we uncharge from mc.from later. */
>  				mc.moved_charge++;
>  			}
>  			if (!device)
> -				putback_lru_page(page);
> -put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the page */
> -			put_page(page);
> +				folio_putback_lru(folio);
> +put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the folio */
> +			folio_put(folio);
>  			break;
>  		case MC_TARGET_SWAP:
>  			ent = target.ent;

It's been some time since I've looked at this particular code but my
recollection and current understanding is that we are skipping over pte
mapped huge pages for simplicity so that we do not have to recharge
all other ptes from the same huge page. What kind of concern do you see
there?

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Re: [RFC] memcg: Convert mc_target.page to mc_target.folio

[Michal Hocko]

On Wed 16-03-22 20:31:30, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> This is a fairly mechanical change to convert mc_target.page to
> mc_target.folio.  This is a prerequisite for converting
> find_get_incore_page() to find_get_incore_folio().  But I'm not
> convinced it's right, and I'm not convinced the existing code is
> quite right either.
> 
> In particular, the code in hunk @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ needs
> careful review.  There are also assumptions in here that a memory
> allocation is never larger than a PMD, which is true today, but I've
> been asked about larger allocations.

Could you be more specific about those usecases? Are they really
interested in supporting larger pages for the memcg migration which is
v1 only feature? Or you are interested merely to have the code more
generic?

[...]
> @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
>  		case MC_TARGET_DEVICE:
>  			device = true;
>  			fallthrough;
> -		case MC_TARGET_PAGE:
> -			page = target.page;
> +		case MC_TARGET_FOLIO:
> +			folio = target.folio;
>  			/*
> -			 * We can have a part of the split pmd here. Moving it
> -			 * can be done but it would be too convoluted so simply
> -			 * ignore such a partial THP and keep it in original
> -			 * memcg. There should be somebody mapping the head.
> +			 * Is bailing out here with a large folio still the
> +			 * right thing to do?  Unclear.
>  			 */
> -			if (PageTransCompound(page))
> +			if (folio_test_large(folio))
>  				goto put;
> -			if (!device && isolate_lru_page(page))
> +			if (!device && folio_isolate_lru(folio))
>  				goto put;
> -			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(page, false,
> +			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, false,
>  						mc.from, mc.to)) {
>  				mc.precharge--;
>  				/* we uncharge from mc.from later. */
>  				mc.moved_charge++;
>  			}
>  			if (!device)
> -				putback_lru_page(page);
> -put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the page */
> -			put_page(page);
> +				folio_putback_lru(folio);
> +put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the folio */
> +			folio_put(folio);
>  			break;
>  		case MC_TARGET_SWAP:
>  			ent = target.ent;

It's been some time since I've looked at this particular code but my
recollection and current understanding is that we are skipping over pte
mapped huge pages for simplicity so that we do not have to recharge
all other ptes from the same huge page. What kind of concern do you see
there?

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Re: [RFC] memcg: Convert mc_target.page to mc_target.folio

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 12:58:46PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 16-03-22 20:31:30, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > This is a fairly mechanical change to convert mc_target.page to
> > mc_target.folio.  This is a prerequisite for converting
> > find_get_incore_page() to find_get_incore_folio().  But I'm not
> > convinced it's right, and I'm not convinced the existing code is
> > quite right either.
> > 
> > In particular, the code in hunk @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ needs
> > careful review.  There are also assumptions in here that a memory
> > allocation is never larger than a PMD, which is true today, but I've
> > been asked about larger allocations.
> 
> Could you be more specific about those usecases? Are they really
> interested in supporting larger pages for the memcg migration which is
> v1 only feature? Or you are interested merely to have the code more
> generic?

Ah!  I didn't realise memcg migration was a v1-only feature.  I think
that makes all of the questions much less interesting.  I've done some
more reading, and it seems like all of this is "best effort", so it
doesn't really matter if some folios get skipped.

I'm not entirely sure what the usecases are for >PMD sized folios.
I think the people who are asking for them probably overestimate how
useful / practical they'll turn out to be.  I sense it's a case of "our
hardware supports a range of sizes, and we'd like to be able to support
them all", rather than any sensible evaluation of the pros and cons.

> [...]
> > @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
> >  		case MC_TARGET_DEVICE:
> >  			device = true;
> >  			fallthrough;
> > -		case MC_TARGET_PAGE:
> > -			page = target.page;
> > +		case MC_TARGET_FOLIO:
> > +			folio = target.folio;
> >  			/*
> > -			 * We can have a part of the split pmd here. Moving it
> > -			 * can be done but it would be too convoluted so simply
> > -			 * ignore such a partial THP and keep it in original
> > -			 * memcg. There should be somebody mapping the head.
> > +			 * Is bailing out here with a large folio still the
> > +			 * right thing to do?  Unclear.
> >  			 */
> > -			if (PageTransCompound(page))
> > +			if (folio_test_large(folio))
> >  				goto put;
> > -			if (!device && isolate_lru_page(page))
> > +			if (!device && folio_isolate_lru(folio))
> >  				goto put;
> > -			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(page, false,
> > +			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, false,
> >  						mc.from, mc.to)) {
> >  				mc.precharge--;
> >  				/* we uncharge from mc.from later. */
> >  				mc.moved_charge++;
> >  			}
> >  			if (!device)
> > -				putback_lru_page(page);
> > -put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the page */
> > -			put_page(page);
> > +				folio_putback_lru(folio);
> > +put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the folio */
> > +			folio_put(folio);
> >  			break;
> >  		case MC_TARGET_SWAP:
> >  			ent = target.ent;
> 
> It's been some time since I've looked at this particular code but my
> recollection and current understanding is that we are skipping over pte
> mapped huge pages for simplicity so that we do not have to recharge
> all other ptes from the same huge page. What kind of concern do you see
> there?

That makes sense.  I think the case that's currently mishandled is a
THP in tmpfs which is misaligned when mapped to userspace.  It's
skipped, even if the entire THP is mapped.  But maybe that simply
doesn't matter.

I suppose the question is: Do we care if mappings of files are not
migrated to the new memcg?  I'm getting a sense that the answer is "no",
and if we actually ended up skipping all file mappings, it wouldn't
matter.

Thanks for taking a look!

Re: [RFC] memcg: Convert mc_target.page to mc_target.folio

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 12:58:46PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 16-03-22 20:31:30, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > This is a fairly mechanical change to convert mc_target.page to
> > mc_target.folio.  This is a prerequisite for converting
> > find_get_incore_page() to find_get_incore_folio().  But I'm not
> > convinced it's right, and I'm not convinced the existing code is
> > quite right either.
> > 
> > In particular, the code in hunk @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ needs
> > careful review.  There are also assumptions in here that a memory
> > allocation is never larger than a PMD, which is true today, but I've
> > been asked about larger allocations.
> 
> Could you be more specific about those usecases? Are they really
> interested in supporting larger pages for the memcg migration which is
> v1 only feature? Or you are interested merely to have the code more
> generic?

Ah!  I didn't realise memcg migration was a v1-only feature.  I think
that makes all of the questions much less interesting.  I've done some
more reading, and it seems like all of this is "best effort", so it
doesn't really matter if some folios get skipped.

I'm not entirely sure what the usecases are for >PMD sized folios.
I think the people who are asking for them probably overestimate how
useful / practical they'll turn out to be.  I sense it's a case of "our
hardware supports a range of sizes, and we'd like to be able to support
them all", rather than any sensible evaluation of the pros and cons.

> [...]
> > @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ static int mem_cgroup_move_charge_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd,
> >  		case MC_TARGET_DEVICE:
> >  			device = true;
> >  			fallthrough;
> > -		case MC_TARGET_PAGE:
> > -			page = target.page;
> > +		case MC_TARGET_FOLIO:
> > +			folio = target.folio;
> >  			/*
> > -			 * We can have a part of the split pmd here. Moving it
> > -			 * can be done but it would be too convoluted so simply
> > -			 * ignore such a partial THP and keep it in original
> > -			 * memcg. There should be somebody mapping the head.
> > +			 * Is bailing out here with a large folio still the
> > +			 * right thing to do?  Unclear.
> >  			 */
> > -			if (PageTransCompound(page))
> > +			if (folio_test_large(folio))
> >  				goto put;
> > -			if (!device && isolate_lru_page(page))
> > +			if (!device && folio_isolate_lru(folio))
> >  				goto put;
> > -			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(page, false,
> > +			if (!mem_cgroup_move_account(folio, false,
> >  						mc.from, mc.to)) {
> >  				mc.precharge--;
> >  				/* we uncharge from mc.from later. */
> >  				mc.moved_charge++;
> >  			}
> >  			if (!device)
> > -				putback_lru_page(page);
> > -put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the page */
> > -			put_page(page);
> > +				folio_putback_lru(folio);
> > +put:			/* get_mctgt_type() gets the folio */
> > +			folio_put(folio);
> >  			break;
> >  		case MC_TARGET_SWAP:
> >  			ent = target.ent;
> 
> It's been some time since I've looked at this particular code but my
> recollection and current understanding is that we are skipping over pte
> mapped huge pages for simplicity so that we do not have to recharge
> all other ptes from the same huge page. What kind of concern do you see
> there?

That makes sense.  I think the case that's currently mishandled is a
THP in tmpfs which is misaligned when mapped to userspace.  It's
skipped, even if the entire THP is mapped.  But maybe that simply
doesn't matter.

I suppose the question is: Do we care if mappings of files are not
migrated to the new memcg?  I'm getting a sense that the answer is "no",
and if we actually ended up skipping all file mappings, it wouldn't
matter.

Thanks for taking a look!

Re: [RFC] memcg: Convert mc_target.page to mc_target.folio

[Michal Hocko]

On Fri 18-03-22 03:49:27, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 12:58:46PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 16-03-22 20:31:30, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > This is a fairly mechanical change to convert mc_target.page to
> > > mc_target.folio.  This is a prerequisite for converting
> > > find_get_incore_page() to find_get_incore_folio().  But I'm not
> > > convinced it's right, and I'm not convinced the existing code is
> > > quite right either.
> > > 
> > > In particular, the code in hunk @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ needs
> > > careful review.  There are also assumptions in here that a memory
> > > allocation is never larger than a PMD, which is true today, but I've
> > > been asked about larger allocations.
> > 
> > Could you be more specific about those usecases? Are they really
> > interested in supporting larger pages for the memcg migration which is
> > v1 only feature? Or you are interested merely to have the code more
> > generic?
> 
> Ah!  I didn't realise memcg migration was a v1-only feature.  I think
> that makes all of the questions much less interesting.  I've done some
> more reading, and it seems like all of this is "best effort", so it
> doesn't really matter if some folios get skipped.

Yes.
[...]

> That makes sense.  I think the case that's currently mishandled is a
> THP in tmpfs which is misaligned when mapped to userspace.  It's
> skipped, even if the entire THP is mapped.  But maybe that simply
> doesn't matter.
> 
> I suppose the question is: Do we care if mappings of files are not
> migrated to the new memcg?  I'm getting a sense that the answer is "no",
> and if we actually ended up skipping all file mappings, it wouldn't
> matter.

Yes, I wouldn't lose sleep over that. You are not introducing a new
regression. The feature is mostly deprecated (along with the whole v1)
so we tend to prefer bug-to-bug compatibility rather than making the
code more complex to solve a theoretical problem (or at least a problem
that nobody is complaining about).

Thanks!
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

Re: [RFC] memcg: Convert mc_target.page to mc_target.folio

[Michal Hocko]

On Fri 18-03-22 03:49:27, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2022 at 12:58:46PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > On Wed 16-03-22 20:31:30, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > > This is a fairly mechanical change to convert mc_target.page to
> > > mc_target.folio.  This is a prerequisite for converting
> > > find_get_incore_page() to find_get_incore_folio().  But I'm not
> > > convinced it's right, and I'm not convinced the existing code is
> > > quite right either.
> > > 
> > > In particular, the code in hunk @@ -6036,28 +6041,26 @@ needs
> > > careful review.  There are also assumptions in here that a memory
> > > allocation is never larger than a PMD, which is true today, but I've
> > > been asked about larger allocations.
> > 
> > Could you be more specific about those usecases? Are they really
> > interested in supporting larger pages for the memcg migration which is
> > v1 only feature? Or you are interested merely to have the code more
> > generic?
> 
> Ah!  I didn't realise memcg migration was a v1-only feature.  I think
> that makes all of the questions much less interesting.  I've done some
> more reading, and it seems like all of this is "best effort", so it
> doesn't really matter if some folios get skipped.

Yes.
[...]

> That makes sense.  I think the case that's currently mishandled is a
> THP in tmpfs which is misaligned when mapped to userspace.  It's
> skipped, even if the entire THP is mapped.  But maybe that simply
> doesn't matter.
> 
> I suppose the question is: Do we care if mappings of files are not
> migrated to the new memcg?  I'm getting a sense that the answer is "no",
> and if we actually ended up skipping all file mappings, it wouldn't
> matter.

Yes, I wouldn't lose sleep over that. You are not introducing a new
regression. The feature is mostly deprecated (along with the whole v1)
so we tend to prefer bug-to-bug compatibility rather than making the
code more complex to solve a theoretical problem (or at least a problem
that nobody is complaining about).

Thanks!
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs