Re: [PATCH v4 1/3] mm: pagewalk: simplify hugepage boundary
From: David Laight
Date: Thu Dec 25 2025 - 06:42:27 EST
On Thu, 25 Dec 2025 10:32:46 +0100
"David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/24/25 19:06, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 24, 2025 at 02:08:29PM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> >>>>> +++ b/mm/pagewalk.c
> >>>>> @@ -312,8 +312,7 @@ static int walk_pgd_range(unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
> >>>>> static unsigned long hugetlb_entry_end(struct hstate *h, unsigned long addr,
> >>>>> unsigned long end)
> >>>>> {
> >>>>> - unsigned long boundary = (addr & huge_page_mask(h)) + huge_page_size(h);
> >>>>> - return boundary < end ? boundary : end;
> >>>>> + return min(ALIGN(addr, huge_page_size(h)), end);
> >>>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>> Please drop this patch from the mm-new branch, as it causes
> >>>> 'run_vmtests.sh' to hang. Specifically, it leads to the system hanging
> >>>> when executing hugepage-vmemmap test, because the program falls into an
> >>>> infinite loop in walk_hugetlb_range() and cannot break out.
> >>>
> >>> Good catch! The problem is that ALIGN() returns addr itself when already
> >>> aligned, causing the infinite loop ...
> >>
> >> Using ALIGN(addr + 1, huge_page_size(h)) would work.
> >> Although it could be (addr + 1) & ~huge_page_mask(h) which is probably
> >> the easiest to understand.
> >> Some of the 'helper' macros don't really make the code easier to read.
> >> (And that includes a lot of uses of min().)
> >
> > Or we could go back to my original suggestion.
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/aRyOWrARRlUCeEz6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >
> > which was in v2:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/f802959f58865371ba1b10081bced98e3784c5e4.1763796152.git.chandna.sahil@xxxxxxxxx/
>
> I'm starting to wonder whether we should just leave that code alone :)
>
Maybe 'we' should stop checkpatch (etc) suggesting min() in trivial
cases. It doesn't really make the code better.
David