Re: [PATCH 3/5] mm/rmap: refactor some code around lazyfree folio unmapping
From: David Hildenbrand (Arm)
Date: Thu Jul 09 2026 - 10:04:36 EST
On 7/9/26 14:16, Dev Jain wrote:
>
>
> On 07/07/26 7:48 pm, David Hildenbrand (Arm) wrote:
>> On 7/7/26 14:11, Dev Jain wrote:
>>> For lazyfree folio unmapping, after clearing the ptes we must abort the
>>> operation if the folio got dirtied or it has unexpected references.
>>>
>>> Refactor this logic into a function which will return whether we need
>>> to abort or not.
>>>
>>> If we abort, we restore the ptes and bail out of try_to_unmap_one.
>>> Otherwise adjust the rss stats of the mm and jump to a label.
>>>
>>> Also rename that label from "discard" to "finish_unmap"; the former
>>> is appropriate in the lazyfree context, but the code following the label
>>> is executed for other successful unmap code paths too, so 'discard' does
>>> not sound correct for them.
>>>
>>> No functional change intended.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Dev Jain <dev.jain@xxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> mm/rmap.c | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
>>> 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
>>> index 934773dfa2f2a..00b571c2a1bab 100644
>>> --- a/mm/rmap.c
>>> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
>>> @@ -2067,6 +2067,52 @@ static bool try_to_unmap_hugetlb_one(struct folio *folio,
>>> return ret;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +static inline bool ttu_anon_lazyfree_folio(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>> + struct folio *folio)
>>> +{
>>> + int ref_count, map_count;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Synchronize with gup_pte_range():
>>> + * - clear PTE; barrier; read refcount
>>> + * - inc refcount; barrier; read PTE
>>> + */
>>> + smp_mb();
>>> +
>>> + ref_count = folio_ref_count(folio);
>>> + map_count = folio_mapcount(folio);
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Order reads for page refcount and dirty flag
>>> + * (see comments in __remove_mapping()).
>>> + */
>>> + smp_rmb();
>>> +
>>> + if (folio_test_dirty(folio) && !(vma->vm_flags & VM_DROPPABLE)) {
>>> + /*
>>> + * redirtied either using the page table or a previously
>>> + * obtained GUP reference.
>>> + */
>>> + folio_set_swapbacked(folio);
>>> + return false;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + if (ref_count != 1 + map_count) {
>>> + /*
>>> + * Additional reference. Could be a GUP reference or any
>>> + * speculative reference. GUP users must mark the folio
>>> + * dirty if there was a modification. This folio cannot be
>>> + * reclaimed right now either way, so act just like nothing
>>> + * happened.
>>> + * We'll come back here later and detect if the folio was
>>> + * dirtied when the additional reference is gone.
>>> + */
>>> + return false;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + return true;
>>
>> You could simply do
>>
>>
>> /*
>> * Additional references could be due to GUP or from a speculative
>> * lookup. ...
>
> Are you also suggesting to shorten the comment?
To reduce its indentation and then comment on the conditional
"Additional references could be due to GUP or from a speculative .."
Instead of "Additional reference."
--
Cheers,
David