Re: [PATCH] mm/mglru: Fix young counter undercount for large folios
From: Baolin Wang
Date: Wed Aug 12 2026 - 21:10:08 EST
On 8/13/26 8:53 AM, Barry Song wrote:
On Wed, Aug 12, 2026 at 6:17 PM Baolin Wang
<baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 8/12/26 2:59 PM, Hui Zhu wrote:
From: Hui Zhu <zhuhui@xxxxxxxxxx>
In lru_gen_look_around(), the young counter tracks the number of young
PTEs. The original folio's contribution is represented by the initial
value of young: test_and_clear_young_ptes_notify() is called on it at
function entry, and the function returns early if it is not young. In
the subsequent loop, the original folio is skipped (its accessed bits
were already cleared), so it is not double-counted.
However, young is initialized to 1 regardless of the folio size. When
the original folio is a large folio with nr PTEs, its young count is
underestimated by nr - 1. This inconsistency can cause
suitable_to_scan() to return false, preventing the PMD from being added
to the bloom filter and reducing aging accuracy for mTHP workloads.
Initialize young to nr so the original folio is accounted the same way
as other young folios in the loop (young += nr).
Signed-off-by: Hui Zhu <zhuhui@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Good catch. Please also add the Fixes tag:
Fixes: 56e5b60b2114 ("mm: support batched checking of the young flag for
MGLRU")
With that,
Reviewed-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi Baolin, Hui,
I am not convinced this is the correct patch. test_and_clear_young_ptes_notify()
only indicates that there is at least one young PTE among the nr PTEs;
it does not mean that all of the PTEs are young.
Am I missing something?
You are right. But I explained why this is done in my original commit 56e5b60b2114:
"
Note that we also update the 'young' counter and 'mm_stats[MM_LEAF_YOUNG]' counter with the batched count in the lru_gen_look_around() and walk_pte_range(). However, the batched operations may inflate these two counters, because in a large folio not all PTEs may have been accessed. (Additionally, tracking how many PTEs have been accessed within a large folio is not very meaningful, since the mm core actually tracks access/dirty on a per-folio basis, not per page). The impact analysis is as follows:
1. The 'mm_stats[MM_LEAF_YOUNG]' counter has no functional impact and is mainly for debugging.
2. The 'young' counter is used to decide whether to place the current PMD entry into the bloom filters by suitable_to_scan() (so that next time we can check whether it has been accessed again), which may set the hash bit in the bloom filters for a PMD entry that hasn't seen much access. However, bloom filters inherently allow some error, so this effect appears negligible.
"
Based on this, I think changing it to 'nr' is reasonable. For an accessed large folio, it's better to have the bloom filter rescan the PMD and keep it in memory instead of reclaiming it incorrectly.
bool contpte_test_and_clear_young_ptes(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep, unsigned int nr)
{
...
unsigned long end = addr + nr * PAGE_SIZE;
bool young = false;
ptep = contpte_align_addr_ptep(&addr, &end, ptep, nr);
for (; addr != end; ptep++, addr += PAGE_SIZE)
young |= __ptep_test_and_clear_young(vma, addr, ptep);
return young;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(contpte_test_and_clear_young_ptes);
mm/vmscan.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/mm/vmscan.c b/mm/vmscan.c
index bc324e37c5f1..264017850a55 100644
--- a/mm/vmscan.c
+++ b/mm/vmscan.c
@@ -4192,7 +4192,7 @@ bool lru_gen_look_around(struct page_vma_mapped_walk *pvmw, unsigned int nr)
unsigned long end;
struct lru_gen_mm_walk *walk;
struct folio *last = NULL;
- int young = 1;
+ int young = nr;
pte_t *pte = pvmw->pte;
unsigned long addr = pvmw->address;
struct vm_area_struct *vma = pvmw->vma;
Thanks
Barry