Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] mm: hugetlb: Avoid re-allocating global reservations on region add failure

[Joshua Hahn]

On Wed, 09 Sep 2026 14:49:29 -0700 Ackerley Tng via B4 Relay <devnull+ackerleytng.google.com@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> When reserving huge pages for a shared mapping, reservations are first
> requested from the subpool, and any remainder is accounted in global
> reservations. When adding the file region entries fails later in the
> process, the reservation attempt must be rolled back.
> 
> Previously, this error path explicitly dropped the global reservations
> that were just acquired before jumping to the cleanup label. The cleanup
> label then returned the pages to the subpool. If concurrent activity in
> the subpool allowed the subpool to absorb more reservations upon return
> than it supplied initially, the cleanup label calculated a positive
> difference and attempted to allocate new global reservations from scratch.
> 
> This premature release was completely unnecessary because all requested
> pages were already backed globally: partly by the mount guarantee and
> partly by the global reservations just acquired. Prematurely dissolving
> those reservations forced the cleanup path to attempt fresh buddy
> allocations that could fail under memory pressure.
> 
> Instead, track the number of global reservations actually accounted so
> far. In the cleanup label, subtract the already-accounted amount from the
> difference between requested and returned reservations. This ensures
> that when global reservations were already acquired, the adjustment is
> purely non-positive, dropping excess reservations without ever attempting
> fresh allocations.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  mm/hugetlb.c | 8 +++++---
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/hugetlb.c b/mm/hugetlb.c
> index 652cfb55c6e6e..1151ad959ffd5 100644
> --- a/mm/hugetlb.c
> +++ b/mm/hugetlb.c
> @@ -6678,6 +6678,7 @@ long hugetlb_reserve_pages(struct inode *inode,
>  	struct hugepage_subpool *spool = subpool_inode(inode);
>  	struct resv_map *resv_map;
>  	struct hugetlb_cgroup *h_cg = NULL;
> +	long gbl_resv_accted = 0;

Sorry, I think I have a hard time with this variable name ;p (I know,
even though the function is called huetlb_acct_memory) I get a little
bit confused because I can't tell if it's meant to be "accepted"
or "accounted".

I know it puts the line below at 81 columns :p but maybe we can just
split it across 2 lines?

>  	long regions_needed = 0;
>  	long gbl_resv_get;
>  	long gbl_resv_put;
> @@ -6768,6 +6769,7 @@ long hugetlb_reserve_pages(struct inode *inode,
>  	err = hugetlb_acct_memory(h, gbl_resv_get);
>  	if (err < 0)
>  		goto out_put_pages;
> +	gbl_resv_accted = gbl_resv_get;
>  
>  	/*
>  	 * Account for the reservations made. Shared mappings record regions
> @@ -6784,7 +6786,6 @@ long hugetlb_reserve_pages(struct inode *inode,
>  		add = region_add(resv_map, from, to, regions_needed, h, h_cg);
>  
>  		if (unlikely(add < 0)) {
> -			hugetlb_acct_memory(h, -gbl_resv_get);
>  			err = add;
>  			goto out_put_pages;
>  		} else if (unlikely(chg > add)) {
> @@ -6831,9 +6832,10 @@ long hugetlb_reserve_pages(struct inode *inode,
>  	 * There may be a difference between the number of
>  	 * reservations to consume and the number to restore now if
>  	 * there are multiple threads interacting with the subpool -
> -	 * restore the difference.
> +	 * restore the difference, taking into account any global
> +	 * reservations already acquired.
>  	 */
> -	hugetlb_acct_memory(h, gbl_resv_get - gbl_resv_put);
> +	hugetlb_acct_memory(h, gbl_resv_get - gbl_resv_put - gbl_resv_accted);
>  
>  out_uncharge_cgroup:
>  	hugetlb_cgroup_uncharge_cgroup_rsvd(hstate_index(h),
> 
> -- 
> 2.55.0.1007.g17ff1f9808-goog