From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2F7CC54791 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 2024 11:11:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 27B866B0072; Sun, 10 Mar 2024 07:11:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 22BAE6B0074; Sun, 10 Mar 2024 07:11:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 11A606B0075; Sun, 10 Mar 2024 07:11:46 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1CED6B0072 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 2024 07:11:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin15.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ED66A0EDC for ; Sun, 10 Mar 2024 11:11:45 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 81880864170.15.83A26AF Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0648640007 for ; Sun, 10 Mar 2024 11:11:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=QAH7gWCV; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1710069104; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=0q1ol9AtrazQKE1qPi18EndHKRod9BvpAUo+fNXn6DBws7AstVis3vqS7xdoaT0V1LC0MF uQh6dhI9YMRM6Pq1wf3+j+7Oc8oUIxnXgb1sB7V4E4Y6OGSuRkeFi5B/scWSxdtnsZ5UnM H2TAXxjuwLehCvRFlbbr3Hx3GcVxFHY= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=QAH7gWCV; dmarc=none; spf=none (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1710069104; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=XRWfuAUuWYX7vbKt7XYFXsRUP16EXNghM1c5ZHcX/fA=; b=FrT/zbvDOxmIZKNqSkeCyRKdveX6cab+1cTahy/+gENY5x1FchRACnRFdlJVbEE/3hlh63 9KbB3sYNN+qKZ/y2zhvvMPOjL8zMhE4dGzg0edvM46KoHAgTZpXrfgMaOx5WnrqRYGVecX rtWnEVfdulJK+ilTaxagIvKM4QNdz0Y= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=XRWfuAUuWYX7vbKt7XYFXsRUP16EXNghM1c5ZHcX/fA=; b=QAH7gWCVGuaE0klgXDBFg3el9d wnSS06eeo+XY6MKvkL+y7s/yd7DtELvR782Dtl2yd+X29UCMnZvH9yiGT3whUy40py9JLLVikg+Zf ZjvXB/9TbQRoYGgmQbO5UDcN5F1jxlXkDuAyYXwB/gpUEwud3/90Wo+rYlHWy7l+bHPgSgK3VIIzS ZVa9FBAkS6Mh0UtVQ53E8jq+Luz8cMhhZdr/o3xhsMDNRf0owjhVFOpAv74xhOujmxtrWWsJNH6Xj mbVLVJGPdi2yY6YZtYmCx29b4ZYY90AoujyDEv96m6Krt1Ow5H2MV1B5XVbEfJ1m6AWIzcUiZ7w88 D+ANBHVg==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1rjH5i-0000000Fnpt-0uQs; Sun, 10 Mar 2024 11:11:42 +0000 Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2024 11:11:42 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Ryan Roberts Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 10/18] mm: Allow non-hugetlb large folios to be batch processed Message-ID: References: <20240227174254.710559-1-willy@infradead.org> <20240227174254.710559-11-willy@infradead.org> <367a14f7-340e-4b29-90ae-bc3fcefdd5f4@arm.com> <8cd67a3d-81a7-4127-9d17-a1d465c3f9e8@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8cd67a3d-81a7-4127-9d17-a1d465c3f9e8@arm.com> X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 0648640007 X-Stat-Signature: onbxc13cxk6x483d9gd4zztfcht7j5b7 X-HE-Tag: 1710069103-942853 X-HE-Meta: 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 wvCA9Vw+ gCkNAW4bFTdiP5Gevq4pHrA0OugLTIN+NX45VSyCgUu79YsHEpFZHMK3imUQYXHIcKPWbmEZqLtFRCMTAhs59UWZnzgbCT0D0tYYu4nvDy87sAV1ZFTbB46tIf5Y3LKvr/JB1RJNmLJaLW2Y= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000201, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Sun, Mar 10, 2024 at 11:01:06AM +0000, Ryan Roberts wrote: > > So after my patch, instead of calling (in order): > > > > page_cache_release(folio); > > folio_undo_large_rmappable(folio); > > mem_cgroup_uncharge(folio); > > free_unref_page() > > > > it calls: > > > > __page_cache_release(folio, &lruvec, &flags); > > mem_cgroup_uncharge_folios() > > folio_undo_large_rmappable(folio); > > I was just looking at this again, and something pops out... > > You have swapped the order of folio_undo_large_rmappable() and > mem_cgroup_uncharge(). But folio_undo_large_rmappable() calls > get_deferred_split_queue() which tries to get the split queue from > folio_memcg(folio) first and falls back to pgdat otherwise. If you are now > calling mem_cgroup_uncharge_folios() first, will that remove the folio from the > cgroup? Then we are operating on the wrong list? (just a guess based on the name > of the function...) Oh my. You've got it. This explains everything. Thank you!