Re: [PATCH] khugepaged: convert redundant check to WARN_ON
From: Andrew Morton
Date: Thu Feb 19 2026 - 17:33:36 EST
On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 11:18:27 +0530 Dev Jain <dev.jain@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Claim: folio_order(folio) == HPAGE_PMD_ORDER => folio->index == start.
>
> Proof: Both loops in hpage_collapse_scan_file and collapse_file, which
> iterate on the xarray, have the invariant that
> start <= folio->index < start + HPAGE_PMD_NR ... (i)
> A folio is always naturally aligned in the pagecache, therefore
> folio_order == HPAGE_PMD_ORDER => IS_ALIGNED(folio->index, HPAGE_PMD_NR) == true ... (ii)
> thp_vma_allowable_order -> thp_vma_suitable_order requires that the virtual
> offsets in the VMA are aligned to the order,
> => IS_ALIGNED(start, HPAGE_PMD_NR) == true ... (iii)
>
> Combining (i), (ii) and (iii), the claim is proven.
>
> Therefore, convert this to a VM_WARN_ON.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/mm/khugepaged.c
> +++ b/mm/khugepaged.c
> @@ -2000,8 +2000,9 @@ static enum scan_result collapse_file(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr,
> * we locked the first folio, then a THP might be there already.
> * This will be discovered on the first iteration.
> */
> - if (folio_order(folio) == HPAGE_PMD_ORDER &&
> - folio->index == start) {
> + if (folio_order(folio) == HPAGE_PMD_ORDER) {
> + VM_WARN_ON(folio->index != start);
It's a bad sad to remove unneeded code by retaining that code and
adding even more code.
Perhaps add a comment reminding us to remove this altogether at a later
date?