Re: [PATCH v6 4/5] mm/memory-failure: skip take_page_off_buddy after dissolving HWPoison HugeTLB page

From: Miaohe Lin

Date: Fri Jul 17 2026 - 03:49:47 EST


On 2026/7/6 2:07, Jiaqi Yan wrote:
> Now that HWPoison subpage(s) within HugeTLB page will be rejected by
> buddy allocator during dissolve_free_hugetlb_folio(), there is no
> need to drain_all_pages() and take_page_off_buddy() anymore. In fact,
> calling take_page_off_buddy() after dissolve_free_hugetlb_folio()
> succeeded returns false, making caller think __page_handle_poison()
> failed.
>
> Add __hugepage_handle_poison() and replace __page_handle_poison() at
> HugeTLB specific call sites. The being handled HugeTLB page either
> is free at the moment of try_memory_failure_hugetlb(), or becomes
> free at the moment of me_huge_page().
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiaqi Yan <jiaqiyan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/memory-failure.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
> index 3d15b4c1b694..a37b67550718 100644
> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
> @@ -174,6 +174,30 @@ static struct rb_root_cached pfn_space_itree = RB_ROOT_CACHED;
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(pfn_space_lock);
>
> /*
> + * Only for a HugeTLB page being handled by memory_failure(). The key
> + * difference to soft_offline() is that, no HWPoison subpage will make
> + * into buddy allocator after a successful dissolve_free_hugetlb_folio(),
> + * so take_page_off_buddy() is unnecessary.
> + */
> +static int __hugepage_handle_poison(struct page *page)
> +{
> + struct folio *folio = page_folio(page);
> +
> + /*
> + * Can't use dissolve_free_hugetlb_folio() without a reliable
> + * raw_hwp_list telling which subpage is HWPoison. So do not free
> + * them to the buddy allocator. dequeue_hugetlb_folio_node_exact()
> + * will ensure to never re-allocate this hugepage.
> + */
> + if (folio_test_hugetlb_raw_hwp_unreliable(folio))
> + /* raw_hwp_list becomes unreliable when kmalloc() fails. */
> + return -ENOMEM;

There are some branches in __update_and_free_hugetlb_folio that will leave hugetlb
folio untouched:

static void __update_and_free_hugetlb_folio(struct hstate *h,
struct folio *folio)
{
bool clear_flag = folio_test_hugetlb_vmemmap_optimized(folio);

if (hstate_is_gigantic_no_runtime(h))
return;<-- 1

/*
* If we don't know which subpages are hwpoisoned, we can't free
* the hugepage, so it's leaked intentionally.
*/
if (folio_test_hugetlb_raw_hwp_unreliable(folio))
return;<-- 2

/*
* If folio is not vmemmap optimized (!clear_flag), then the folio
* is no longer identified as a hugetlb page. hugetlb_vmemmap_restore_folio
* can only be passed hugetlb pages and will BUG otherwise.
*/
if (clear_flag && hugetlb_vmemmap_restore_folio(h, folio)) {
spin_lock_irq(&hugetlb_lock);
/*
* If we cannot allocate vmemmap pages, just refuse to free the
* page and put the page back on the hugetlb free list and treat
* as a surplus page.
*/
add_hugetlb_folio(h, folio, true);
spin_unlock_irq(&hugetlb_lock);
return;<-- 3
}

But __update_and_free_hugetlb_folio has no return value. So caller can't know exactly
whether hugetlb folio is indeed dissolved. So maybe we need a way to detect whether
hugetlb folio is indeed dissolved?

Note before this patch, take_page_off_buddy will fail if hugetlb folio is not dissolved.

Thanks.
.