Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mm: support promotion-only NUMA hinting scans
From: David Hildenbrand (Arm)
Date: Fri Sep 18 2026 - 09:02:25 EST
On 9/11/26 02:18, Gregory Price wrote:
> From: "Gregory Price (Meta)" <gourry@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> folio_can_map_prot_numa() derives the eligible memory from the global
> balancing mode. Combined mode needs the scanner to distinguish placement
> scans from promotion-only scans.
>
> Add MM_CP_PROT_NUMA_PROMO_ONLY and let change_prot_numa() callers request
> a promotion-only protection walk. Carry the choice with each walk so the
> PTE and PMD paths use the same decision.
>
> Initially derive the value from the normal balancing mode, preserving the
> existing behavior for the following fixes.
>
> Fixes: c574bbe91703 ("NUMA balancing: optimize page placement for memory tiering system")
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Assisted-by: LLM
> Signed-off-by: Gregory Price (Meta) <gourry@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/mm.h | 4 +++-
> kernel/sched/fair.c | 7 ++++++-
> mm/huge_memory.c | 3 ++-
> mm/internal.h | 5 +++--
> mm/mempolicy.c | 22 +++++++++++++---------
> mm/mprotect.c | 4 +++-
> 6 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
> index 969594074fd2..2d1b59a27629 100644
> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
> @@ -3408,6 +3408,8 @@ int get_cmdline(struct task_struct *task, char *buffer, int buflen);
> #define MM_CP_UFFD_RWP_RESOLVE (1UL << 5) /* resolve rwp */
> #define MM_CP_UFFD_RWP_ALL (MM_CP_UFFD_RWP | \
> MM_CP_UFFD_RWP_RESOLVE)
> +/* Whether a MM_CP_PROT_NUMA change is for promotion only */
> +#define MM_CP_PROT_NUMA_PROMO_ONLY (1UL << 6)
BTW, shouldn't we just be using BIT()?
>
> bool can_change_pte_writable(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
> pte_t pte);
> @@ -4736,7 +4738,7 @@ void vma_set_file(struct vm_area_struct *vma, struct file *file);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING
> unsigned long change_prot_numa(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> - unsigned long start, unsigned long end);
> + unsigned long start, unsigned long end, bool promo_only);
While at it use two tabs.
> #endif
>
> struct vm_area_struct *find_extend_vma_locked(struct mm_struct *,
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index 8dff37059faf..81359b414947 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -4129,8 +4129,10 @@ static void task_numa_work(struct callback_head *work)
> unsigned long nr_pte_updates = 0;
> long pages, virtpages;
> struct vma_iterator vmi;
> + unsigned int numab_mode = READ_ONCE(sysctl_numa_balancing_mode);
const and all the way to the top?
> bool vma_pids_skipped;
> bool vma_pids_forced = false;
> + bool promo_only;
>
> WARN_ON_ONCE(p != container_of(work, struct task_struct, numa_work));
>
> @@ -4304,11 +4306,14 @@ static void task_numa_work(struct callback_head *work)
> continue;
> }
>
> + promo_only = !(numab_mode & NUMA_BALANCING_NORMAL);
bool promo_only = !(numab_mode & NUMA_BALANCING_NORMAL);
and in the later patch
if (vma_is_ro_file(vma))
promo_only = true;
?
But ...
> +
> do {
> start = max(start, vma->vm_start);
> end = ALIGN(start + (pages << PAGE_SHIFT), HPAGE_SIZE);
> end = min(end, vma->vm_end);
> - nr_pte_updates = change_prot_numa(vma, start, end);
> + nr_pte_updates = change_prot_numa(vma, start, end,
> + promo_only);
Stupid question: why can't/shouldn't change_prot_numa() query
sysctl_numa_balancing_mode? Why do we have to query this outside of the function
and forward it?
I mean, change_prot_numa() gets the vma and can query
sysctl_numa_balancing_mode. Why not move that into the function and avoid the
boolean parameter?
We do have a single change_prot_numa() caller in the tree ...
>
> /*
> * Try to scan sysctl_numa_balancing_size worth of
> diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
> index 30b7c63b0e35..2f9ada1bbcfc 100644
> --- a/mm/huge_memory.c
> +++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
> @@ -2784,7 +2784,8 @@ int change_huge_pmd(struct mmu_gather *tlb, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> goto unlock;
>
> if (!folio_can_map_prot_numa(pmd_folio(*pmd), vma,
> - vma_is_single_threaded_private(vma)))
> + vma_is_single_threaded_private(vma),
> + cp_flags & MM_CP_PROT_NUMA_PROMO_ONLY))
As raised, maybe just forward cp_flags
--
Cheers,
David