Re: [PATCH v4] mm/memory hotplug/unplug: Optimize zone->contiguous update when changes pfn range
From: David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)
Date: Tue Dec 02 2025 - 05:25:12 EST
+};
I don't like that the defines don't match the enum name (zone_c... vs.
CONT... ).
Essentially you want a "yes / no / maybe" tristate. I don't think we
have an existing type for that, unfortunately.
enum zone_contig_state {
ZONE_CONTIG_YES,
ZONE_CONTIG_NO,
ZONE_CONTIG_MAYBE,
};
Maybe someone reading along has a better idea.
I agree it's better. Will wait for a day or two to make the change.
Yes, good idea. No needs to rush at this point because the merge window
just opened up.
+
+void set_zone_contiguous(struct zone *zone, enum
zone_contiguous_state state);
bool pfn_range_intersects_zones(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn,
unsigned long nr_pages);
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index 0be83039c3b5..b74e558ce822 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -544,6 +544,32 @@ static void update_pgdat_span(struct pglist_data
*pgdat)
pgdat->node_spanned_pages = node_end_pfn - node_start_pfn;
}
+static enum zone_contiguous_state __meminit
clear_zone_contiguous_for_shrinking(
+ struct zone *zone, unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long
nr_pages)
+{
+ const unsigned long end_pfn = start_pfn + nr_pages;
+ enum zone_contiguous_state result = CONTIGUOUS_UNDETERMINED;
+
+ /*
+ * If the removed pfn range inside the original zone span, the
contiguous
+ * property is surely false.
+ */
+ if (start_pfn > zone->zone_start_pfn && end_pfn <
zone_end_pfn(zone))
+ result = CONTIGUOUS_DEFINITELY_NOT;
+
+ /*
+ * If the removed pfn range is at the beginning or end of the
+ * original zone span, the contiguous property is preserved when
+ * the original zone is contiguous.
+ */
+ else if (start_pfn == zone->zone_start_pfn || end_pfn ==
zone_end_pfn(zone))
+ result = zone->contiguous ?
+ CONTIGUOUS_DEFINITELY : CONTIGUOUS_UNDETERMINED;
+
See my comment below on how to make this readable.
+ clear_zone_contiguous(zone);
+ return result;
+}
+
void remove_pfn_range_from_zone(struct zone *zone,
unsigned long start_pfn,
unsigned long nr_pages)
@@ -551,6 +577,7 @@ void remove_pfn_range_from_zone(struct zone *zone,
const unsigned long end_pfn = start_pfn + nr_pages;
struct pglist_data *pgdat = zone->zone_pgdat;
unsigned long pfn, cur_nr_pages;
+ enum zone_contiguous_state contiguous_state =
CONTIGUOUS_UNDETERMINED;
/* Poison struct pages because they are now uninitialized
again. */
for (pfn = start_pfn; pfn < end_pfn; pfn += cur_nr_pages) {
@@ -571,12 +598,13 @@ void remove_pfn_range_from_zone(struct zone *zone,
if (zone_is_zone_device(zone))
return;
- clear_zone_contiguous(zone);
+ contiguous_state = clear_zone_contiguous_for_shrinking(
+ zone, start_pfn, nr_pages);
Reading this again, I wonder whether it would be nicer to have
something like:
new_contig_state = zone_contig_state_after_shrinking();
clear_zone_contiguous(zone);
or sth like that. Similar for the growing case.
In both shrinking and growing case, separate the clear_zone_contiguous
from the logic of zone state check, right?
Yes, I think that makes it look a bit nicer.
--
Cheers
David