| Message ID | 20240617231137.80726-4-21cnbao@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | mm: clarify folio_add_new_anon_rmap() and __folio_add_anon_rmap() | expand |
On 18.06.24 01:11, Barry Song wrote: > From: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com> > > The folio_test_anon(folio)==false cases has been relocated to > folio_add_new_anon_rmap(). Additionally, four other callers > consistently pass anonymous folios. > > stack 1: > remove_migration_pmd > -> folio_add_anon_rmap_pmd > -> __folio_add_anon_rmap > > stack 2: > __split_huge_pmd_locked > -> folio_add_anon_rmap_ptes > -> __folio_add_anon_rmap > > stack 3: > remove_migration_pmd > -> folio_add_anon_rmap_pmd > -> __folio_add_anon_rmap (RMAP_LEVEL_PMD) > > stack 4: > try_to_merge_one_page > -> replace_page > -> folio_add_anon_rmap_pte > -> __folio_add_anon_rmap > > __folio_add_anon_rmap() only needs to handle the cases > folio_test_anon(folio)==true now. > We can remove the !folio_test_anon(folio)) path within > __folio_add_anon_rmap() now. > > Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Barry Song <v-songbaohua@oppo.com> > Tested-by: Shuai Yuan <yuanshuai@oppo.com> > --- > mm/rmap.c | 17 +++-------------- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c > index 2b19bb92eda5..ddcdda752982 100644 > --- a/mm/rmap.c > +++ b/mm/rmap.c > @@ -1297,23 +1297,12 @@ static __always_inline void __folio_add_anon_rmap(struct folio *folio, > { > int i, nr, nr_pmdmapped = 0; > > + VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_anon(folio), folio); > + > nr = __folio_add_rmap(folio, page, nr_pages, level, &nr_pmdmapped); > > - if (unlikely(!folio_test_anon(folio))) { > - VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_locked(folio), folio); > - /* > - * For a PTE-mapped large folio, we only know that the single > - * PTE is exclusive. Further, __folio_set_anon() might not get > - * folio->index right when not given the address of the head > - * page. > - */ > - VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_large(folio) && > - level != RMAP_LEVEL_PMD, folio); > - __folio_set_anon(folio, vma, address, > - !!(flags & RMAP_EXCLUSIVE)); > - } else if (likely(!folio_test_ksm(folio))) { > + if (likely(!folio_test_ksm(folio))) > __page_check_anon_rmap(folio, page, vma, address); > - } > > __folio_mod_stat(folio, nr, nr_pmdmapped); > Lovely! Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c index 2b19bb92eda5..ddcdda752982 100644 --- a/mm/rmap.c +++ b/mm/rmap.c @@ -1297,23 +1297,12 @@ static __always_inline void __folio_add_anon_rmap(struct folio *folio, { int i, nr, nr_pmdmapped = 0; + VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_anon(folio), folio); + nr = __folio_add_rmap(folio, page, nr_pages, level, &nr_pmdmapped); - if (unlikely(!folio_test_anon(folio))) { - VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(!folio_test_locked(folio), folio); - /* - * For a PTE-mapped large folio, we only know that the single - * PTE is exclusive. Further, __folio_set_anon() might not get - * folio->index right when not given the address of the head - * page. - */ - VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_large(folio) && - level != RMAP_LEVEL_PMD, folio); - __folio_set_anon(folio, vma, address, - !!(flags & RMAP_EXCLUSIVE)); - } else if (likely(!folio_test_ksm(folio))) { + if (likely(!folio_test_ksm(folio))) __page_check_anon_rmap(folio, page, vma, address); - } __folio_mod_stat(folio, nr, nr_pmdmapped);