Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] mm: khugepaged: skip lazy-free folios at scanning
From: Lance Yang
Date: Sun Jan 04 2026 - 07:10:43 EST
On 2026/1/4 13:41, Vernon Yang wrote:
For example, create three task: hot1 -> cold -> hot2. After all three
task are created, each allocate memory 128MB. the hot1/hot2 task
continuously access 128 MB memory, while the cold task only accesses
its memory briefly andthen call madvise(MADV_FREE). However, khugepaged
still prioritizes scanning the cold task and only scans the hot2 task
after completing the scan of the cold task.
So if the user has explicitly informed us via MADV_FREE that this memory
will be freed, it is appropriate for khugepaged to skip it only, thereby
avoiding unnecessary scan and collapse operations to reducing CPU
wastage.
Here are the performance test results:
(Throughput bigger is better, other smaller is better)
Testing on x86_64 machine:
| task hot2 | without patch | with patch | delta |
|---------------------|---------------|---------------|---------|
| total accesses time | 3.14 sec | 2.93 sec | -6.69% |
| cycles per access | 4.96 | 2.21 | -55.44% |
| Throughput | 104.38 M/sec | 111.89 M/sec | +7.19% |
| dTLB-load-misses | 284814532 | 69597236 | -75.56% |
Testing on qemu-system-x86_64 -enable-kvm:
| task hot2 | without patch | with patch | delta |
|---------------------|---------------|---------------|---------|
| total accesses time | 3.35 sec | 2.96 sec | -11.64% |
| cycles per access | 7.29 | 2.07 | -71.60% |
| Throughput | 97.67 M/sec | 110.77 M/sec | +13.41% |
| dTLB-load-misses | 241600871 | 3216108 | -98.67% |
Signed-off-by: Vernon Yang <yanglincheng@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/trace/events/huge_memory.h | 1 +
mm/khugepaged.c | 6 ++++++
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/trace/events/huge_memory.h b/include/trace/events/huge_memory.h
index 01225dd27ad5..e99d5f71f2a4 100644
--- a/include/trace/events/huge_memory.h
+++ b/include/trace/events/huge_memory.h
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
EM( SCAN_PAGE_LRU, "page_not_in_lru") \
EM( SCAN_PAGE_LOCK, "page_locked") \
EM( SCAN_PAGE_ANON, "page_not_anon") \
+ EM( SCAN_PAGE_LAZYFREE, "page_lazyfree") \
EM( SCAN_PAGE_COMPOUND, "page_compound") \
EM( SCAN_ANY_PROCESS, "no_process_for_page") \
EM( SCAN_VMA_NULL, "vma_null") \
diff --git a/mm/khugepaged.c b/mm/khugepaged.c
index 30786c706c4a..1ca034a5f653 100644
--- a/mm/khugepaged.c
+++ b/mm/khugepaged.c
@@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ enum scan_result {
SCAN_PAGE_LRU,
SCAN_PAGE_LOCK,
SCAN_PAGE_ANON,
+ SCAN_PAGE_LAZYFREE,
SCAN_PAGE_COMPOUND,
SCAN_ANY_PROCESS,
SCAN_VMA_NULL,
@@ -1337,6 +1338,11 @@ static int hpage_collapse_scan_pmd(struct mm_struct *mm,
}
folio = page_folio(page);
+ if (folio_is_lazyfree(folio)) {
+ result = SCAN_PAGE_LAZYFREE;
+ goto out_unmap;
+ }
That's a bit tricky ... I don't think we need to handle MADV_FREE pages
differently :)
MADV_FREE pages are likely cold memory, but what if there are just
a few MADV_FREE pages in a hot memory region? Skipping the entire
region would be unfortunate ...
Also, even if we skip these pages now, after they are reclaimed, they
become pte_none. Then khugepaged will try to collapse them anyway
(based on khugepaged_max_ptes_none). So skipping them just delays
things, it does not really change the final result ;)
Thanks,
Lance
+
if (!folio_test_anon(folio)) {
result = SCAN_PAGE_ANON;
goto out_unmap;