Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] mm/mremap: Use can_pte_batch_count() instead of folio_pte_batch() for pte batch

From: David Hildenbrand

Date: Mon Oct 27 2025 - 15:44:51 EST


On 27.10.25 15:03, Zhang Qilong wrote:
In current mremap_folio_pte_batch(), 1) pte_batch_hint() always
return one pte in non-ARM64 machine, it is not efficient. 2) Next,
it need to acquire a folio to call the folio_pte_batch().

Due to new added can_pte_batch_count(), we just call it instead of
folio_pte_batch(). And then rename mremap_folio_pte_batch() to
mremap_pte_batch().

Signed-off-by: Zhang Qilong <zhangqilong3@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
mm/mremap.c | 16 +++-------------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/mremap.c b/mm/mremap.c
index bd7314898ec5..d11f93f1622f 100644
--- a/mm/mremap.c
+++ b/mm/mremap.c
@@ -169,27 +169,17 @@ static pte_t move_soft_dirty_pte(pte_t pte)
pte = pte_swp_mksoft_dirty(pte);
#endif
return pte;
}
-static int mremap_folio_pte_batch(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
+static int mremap_pte_batch(struct vm_area_struct *vma, unsigned long addr,
pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte, int max_nr)
{
- struct folio *folio;
-
if (max_nr == 1)
return 1;
- /* Avoid expensive folio lookup if we stand no chance of benefit. */
- if (pte_batch_hint(ptep, pte) == 1)
- return 1;
-
- folio = vm_normal_folio(vma, addr, pte);
- if (!folio || !folio_test_large(folio))
- return 1;
-
- return folio_pte_batch(folio, ptep, pte, max_nr);
+ return can_pte_batch_count(vma, ptep, &pte, max_nr, 0);
}
static int move_ptes(struct pagetable_move_control *pmc,
unsigned long extent, pmd_t *old_pmd, pmd_t *new_pmd)
{
@@ -278,11 +268,11 @@ static int move_ptes(struct pagetable_move_control *pmc,
* make sure the physical page stays valid until
* the TLB entry for the old mapping has been
* flushed.
*/
if (pte_present(old_pte)) {
- nr_ptes = mremap_folio_pte_batch(vma, old_addr, old_ptep,
+ nr_ptes = mremap_pte_batch(vma, old_addr, old_ptep,
old_pte, max_nr_ptes);
force_flush = true;
}
pte = get_and_clear_ptes(mm, old_addr, old_ptep, nr_ptes);

get_and_clear_ptes() documents: "Clear present PTEs that map consecutive pages of the same folio, collecting dirty/accessed bits."

And as can_pte_batch_count() will merge access/dirty bits, you would silently set ptes dirty/accessed that belong to other folios, which sounds very wrong.

Staring at the code, I wonder if there is also a problem with the write bit, have to dig into that.

--
Cheers

David / dhildenb