[PATCH v1 13/39] mm/rmap: factor out adding folio mappings into __folio_add_rmap()

David Hildenbrand posted 39 patches 2 years ago
There is a newer version of this series
[PATCH v1 13/39] mm/rmap: factor out adding folio mappings into __folio_add_rmap()
Posted by David Hildenbrand 2 years ago
Let's factor it out to prepare for reuse as we convert
page_add_anon_rmap() to folio_add_anon_rmap_[pte|ptes|pmd]().

Make the compiler always special-case on the granularity by using
__always_inline.

Reviewed-by: Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
 mm/rmap.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
 1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
index 2ff2f11275e5..c5761986a411 100644
--- a/mm/rmap.c
+++ b/mm/rmap.c
@@ -1157,6 +1157,49 @@ int folio_total_mapcount(struct folio *folio)
 	return mapcount;
 }
 
+static __always_inline unsigned int __folio_add_rmap(struct folio *folio,
+		struct page *page, int nr_pages, enum rmap_mode mode,
+		unsigned int *nr_pmdmapped)
+{
+	atomic_t *mapped = &folio->_nr_pages_mapped;
+	int first, nr = 0;
+
+	__folio_rmap_sanity_checks(folio, page, nr_pages, mode);
+
+	/* Is page being mapped by PTE? Is this its first map to be added? */
+	switch (mode) {
+	case RMAP_MODE_PTE:
+		do {
+			first = atomic_inc_and_test(&page->_mapcount);
+			if (first && folio_test_large(folio)) {
+				first = atomic_inc_return_relaxed(mapped);
+				first = (first < COMPOUND_MAPPED);
+			}
+
+			if (first)
+				nr++;
+		} while (page++, --nr_pages > 0);
+		break;
+	case RMAP_MODE_PMD:
+		first = atomic_inc_and_test(&folio->_entire_mapcount);
+		if (first) {
+			nr = atomic_add_return_relaxed(COMPOUND_MAPPED, mapped);
+			if (likely(nr < COMPOUND_MAPPED + COMPOUND_MAPPED)) {
+				*nr_pmdmapped = folio_nr_pages(folio);
+				nr = *nr_pmdmapped - (nr & FOLIO_PAGES_MAPPED);
+				/* Raced ahead of a remove and another add? */
+				if (unlikely(nr < 0))
+					nr = 0;
+			} else {
+				/* Raced ahead of a remove of COMPOUND_MAPPED */
+				nr = 0;
+			}
+		}
+		break;
+	}
+	return nr;
+}
+
 /**
  * folio_move_anon_rmap - move a folio to our anon_vma
  * @folio:	The folio to move to our anon_vma
@@ -1380,45 +1423,11 @@ static __always_inline void __folio_add_file_rmap(struct folio *folio,
 		struct page *page, int nr_pages, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
 		enum rmap_mode mode)
 {
-	atomic_t *mapped = &folio->_nr_pages_mapped;
-	unsigned int nr_pmdmapped = 0, first;
-	int nr = 0;
+	unsigned int nr, nr_pmdmapped = 0;
 
 	VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_anon(folio), folio);
-	__folio_rmap_sanity_checks(folio, page, nr_pages, mode);
-
-	/* Is page being mapped by PTE? Is this its first map to be added? */
-	switch (mode) {
-	case RMAP_MODE_PTE:
-		do {
-			first = atomic_inc_and_test(&page->_mapcount);
-			if (first && folio_test_large(folio)) {
-				first = atomic_inc_return_relaxed(mapped);
-				first = (first < COMPOUND_MAPPED);
-			}
-
-			if (first)
-				nr++;
-		} while (page++, --nr_pages > 0);
-		break;
-	case RMAP_MODE_PMD:
-		first = atomic_inc_and_test(&folio->_entire_mapcount);
-		if (first) {
-			nr = atomic_add_return_relaxed(COMPOUND_MAPPED, mapped);
-			if (likely(nr < COMPOUND_MAPPED + COMPOUND_MAPPED)) {
-				nr_pmdmapped = folio_nr_pages(folio);
-				nr = nr_pmdmapped - (nr & FOLIO_PAGES_MAPPED);
-				/* Raced ahead of a remove and another add? */
-				if (unlikely(nr < 0))
-					nr = 0;
-			} else {
-				/* Raced ahead of a remove of COMPOUND_MAPPED */
-				nr = 0;
-			}
-		}
-		break;
-	}
 
+	nr = __folio_add_rmap(folio, page, nr_pages, mode, &nr_pmdmapped);
 	if (nr_pmdmapped)
 		__lruvec_stat_mod_folio(folio, folio_test_swapbacked(folio) ?
 			NR_SHMEM_PMDMAPPED : NR_FILE_PMDMAPPED, nr_pmdmapped);
-- 
2.43.0
Re: [PATCH v1 13/39] mm/rmap: factor out adding folio mappings into __folio_add_rmap()
Posted by Ryan Roberts 2 years ago
On 11/12/2023 15:56, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> Let's factor it out to prepare for reuse as we convert
> page_add_anon_rmap() to folio_add_anon_rmap_[pte|ptes|pmd]().
> 
> Make the compiler always special-case on the granularity by using
> __always_inline.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> ---
>  mm/rmap.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
>  1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
> index 2ff2f11275e5..c5761986a411 100644
> --- a/mm/rmap.c
> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
> @@ -1157,6 +1157,49 @@ int folio_total_mapcount(struct folio *folio)
>  	return mapcount;
>  }
>  
> +static __always_inline unsigned int __folio_add_rmap(struct folio *folio,
> +		struct page *page, int nr_pages, enum rmap_mode mode,
> +		unsigned int *nr_pmdmapped)
> +{
> +	atomic_t *mapped = &folio->_nr_pages_mapped;
> +	int first, nr = 0;
> +
> +	__folio_rmap_sanity_checks(folio, page, nr_pages, mode);
> +
> +	/* Is page being mapped by PTE? Is this its first map to be added? */

I suspect this comment is left over from the old version? It sounds a bit odd in
its new context.

> +	switch (mode) {
> +	case RMAP_MODE_PTE:
> +		do {
> +			first = atomic_inc_and_test(&page->_mapcount);
> +			if (first && folio_test_large(folio)) {
> +				first = atomic_inc_return_relaxed(mapped);
> +				first = (first < COMPOUND_MAPPED);
> +			}
> +
> +			if (first)
> +				nr++;
> +		} while (page++, --nr_pages > 0);
> +		break;
> +	case RMAP_MODE_PMD:
> +		first = atomic_inc_and_test(&folio->_entire_mapcount);
> +		if (first) {
> +			nr = atomic_add_return_relaxed(COMPOUND_MAPPED, mapped);
> +			if (likely(nr < COMPOUND_MAPPED + COMPOUND_MAPPED)) {
> +				*nr_pmdmapped = folio_nr_pages(folio);
> +				nr = *nr_pmdmapped - (nr & FOLIO_PAGES_MAPPED);
> +				/* Raced ahead of a remove and another add? */
> +				if (unlikely(nr < 0))
> +					nr = 0;
> +			} else {
> +				/* Raced ahead of a remove of COMPOUND_MAPPED */
> +				nr = 0;
> +			}
> +		}
> +		break;
> +	}
> +	return nr;
> +}
> +
>  /**
>   * folio_move_anon_rmap - move a folio to our anon_vma
>   * @folio:	The folio to move to our anon_vma
> @@ -1380,45 +1423,11 @@ static __always_inline void __folio_add_file_rmap(struct folio *folio,
>  		struct page *page, int nr_pages, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>  		enum rmap_mode mode)
>  {
> -	atomic_t *mapped = &folio->_nr_pages_mapped;
> -	unsigned int nr_pmdmapped = 0, first;
> -	int nr = 0;
> +	unsigned int nr, nr_pmdmapped = 0;

You're still being inconsistent with signed/unsigned here. Is there a reason
these can't be signed like nr_pages in the interface?

>  
>  	VM_WARN_ON_FOLIO(folio_test_anon(folio), folio);
> -	__folio_rmap_sanity_checks(folio, page, nr_pages, mode);
> -
> -	/* Is page being mapped by PTE? Is this its first map to be added? */
> -	switch (mode) {
> -	case RMAP_MODE_PTE:
> -		do {
> -			first = atomic_inc_and_test(&page->_mapcount);
> -			if (first && folio_test_large(folio)) {
> -				first = atomic_inc_return_relaxed(mapped);
> -				first = (first < COMPOUND_MAPPED);
> -			}
> -
> -			if (first)
> -				nr++;
> -		} while (page++, --nr_pages > 0);
> -		break;
> -	case RMAP_MODE_PMD:
> -		first = atomic_inc_and_test(&folio->_entire_mapcount);
> -		if (first) {
> -			nr = atomic_add_return_relaxed(COMPOUND_MAPPED, mapped);
> -			if (likely(nr < COMPOUND_MAPPED + COMPOUND_MAPPED)) {
> -				nr_pmdmapped = folio_nr_pages(folio);
> -				nr = nr_pmdmapped - (nr & FOLIO_PAGES_MAPPED);
> -				/* Raced ahead of a remove and another add? */
> -				if (unlikely(nr < 0))
> -					nr = 0;
> -			} else {
> -				/* Raced ahead of a remove of COMPOUND_MAPPED */
> -				nr = 0;
> -			}
> -		}
> -		break;
> -	}
>  
> +	nr = __folio_add_rmap(folio, page, nr_pages, mode, &nr_pmdmapped);
>  	if (nr_pmdmapped)
>  		__lruvec_stat_mod_folio(folio, folio_test_swapbacked(folio) ?
>  			NR_SHMEM_PMDMAPPED : NR_FILE_PMDMAPPED, nr_pmdmapped);
Re: [PATCH v1 13/39] mm/rmap: factor out adding folio mappings into __folio_add_rmap()
Posted by David Hildenbrand 2 years ago
On 18.12.23 17:07, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> On 11/12/2023 15:56, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> Let's factor it out to prepare for reuse as we convert
>> page_add_anon_rmap() to folio_add_anon_rmap_[pte|ptes|pmd]().
>>
>> Make the compiler always special-case on the granularity by using
>> __always_inline.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>> ---
>>   mm/rmap.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
>>   1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
>> index 2ff2f11275e5..c5761986a411 100644
>> --- a/mm/rmap.c
>> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
>> @@ -1157,6 +1157,49 @@ int folio_total_mapcount(struct folio *folio)
>>   	return mapcount;
>>   }
>>   
>> +static __always_inline unsigned int __folio_add_rmap(struct folio *folio,
>> +		struct page *page, int nr_pages, enum rmap_mode mode,
>> +		unsigned int *nr_pmdmapped)
>> +{
>> +	atomic_t *mapped = &folio->_nr_pages_mapped;
>> +	int first, nr = 0;
>> +
>> +	__folio_rmap_sanity_checks(folio, page, nr_pages, mode);
>> +
>> +	/* Is page being mapped by PTE? Is this its first map to be added? */
> 
> I suspect this comment is left over from the old version? It sounds a bit odd in
> its new context.

In this patch, I'm just moving the code, so it would have to be dropped 
in a previous patch.

I'm happy to drop all these comments in previous patches.

> 
>> +	switch (mode) {
>> +	case RMAP_MODE_PTE:
>> +		do {
>> +			first = atomic_inc_and_test(&page->_mapcount);
>> +			if (first && folio_test_large(folio)) {
>> +				first = atomic_inc_return_relaxed(mapped);
>> +				first = (first < COMPOUND_MAPPED);
>> +			}
>> +
>> +			if (first)
>> +				nr++;
>> +		} while (page++, --nr_pages > 0);
>> +		break;
>> +	case RMAP_MODE_PMD:
>> +		first = atomic_inc_and_test(&folio->_entire_mapcount);
>> +		if (first) {
>> +			nr = atomic_add_return_relaxed(COMPOUND_MAPPED, mapped);
>> +			if (likely(nr < COMPOUND_MAPPED + COMPOUND_MAPPED)) {
>> +				*nr_pmdmapped = folio_nr_pages(folio);
>> +				nr = *nr_pmdmapped - (nr & FOLIO_PAGES_MAPPED);
>> +				/* Raced ahead of a remove and another add? */
>> +				if (unlikely(nr < 0))
>> +					nr = 0;
>> +			} else {
>> +				/* Raced ahead of a remove of COMPOUND_MAPPED */
>> +				nr = 0;
>> +			}
>> +		}
>> +		break;
>> +	}
>> +	return nr;
>> +}
>> +
>>   /**
>>    * folio_move_anon_rmap - move a folio to our anon_vma
>>    * @folio:	The folio to move to our anon_vma
>> @@ -1380,45 +1423,11 @@ static __always_inline void __folio_add_file_rmap(struct folio *folio,
>>   		struct page *page, int nr_pages, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>   		enum rmap_mode mode)
>>   {
>> -	atomic_t *mapped = &folio->_nr_pages_mapped;
>> -	unsigned int nr_pmdmapped = 0, first;
>> -	int nr = 0;
>> +	unsigned int nr, nr_pmdmapped = 0;
> 
> You're still being inconsistent with signed/unsigned here. Is there a reason
> these can't be signed like nr_pages in the interface?

I can turn them into signed values.

Personally, I think it's misleading to use "signed" for values that have 
absolutely no meaning for negative meaning. But sure, we can be 
consistent, at least in rmap code.

-- 
Cheers,

David / dhildenb
Re: [PATCH v1 13/39] mm/rmap: factor out adding folio mappings into __folio_add_rmap()
Posted by Ryan Roberts 2 years ago
On 18/12/2023 17:06, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 18.12.23 17:07, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> On 11/12/2023 15:56, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> Let's factor it out to prepare for reuse as we convert
>>> page_add_anon_rmap() to folio_add_anon_rmap_[pte|ptes|pmd]().
>>>
>>> Make the compiler always special-case on the granularity by using
>>> __always_inline.
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>>> ---
>>>   mm/rmap.c | 81 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
>>>   1 file changed, 45 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/mm/rmap.c b/mm/rmap.c
>>> index 2ff2f11275e5..c5761986a411 100644
>>> --- a/mm/rmap.c
>>> +++ b/mm/rmap.c
>>> @@ -1157,6 +1157,49 @@ int folio_total_mapcount(struct folio *folio)
>>>       return mapcount;
>>>   }
>>>   +static __always_inline unsigned int __folio_add_rmap(struct folio *folio,
>>> +        struct page *page, int nr_pages, enum rmap_mode mode,
>>> +        unsigned int *nr_pmdmapped)
>>> +{
>>> +    atomic_t *mapped = &folio->_nr_pages_mapped;
>>> +    int first, nr = 0;
>>> +
>>> +    __folio_rmap_sanity_checks(folio, page, nr_pages, mode);
>>> +
>>> +    /* Is page being mapped by PTE? Is this its first map to be added? */
>>
>> I suspect this comment is left over from the old version? It sounds a bit odd in
>> its new context.
> 
> In this patch, I'm just moving the code, so it would have to be dropped in a
> previous patch.
> 
> I'm happy to drop all these comments in previous patches.

Well it doesn't really mean much to me in this new context, so I would reword if
there is still something you need to convey to the reader, else just remove.

> 
>>
>>> +    switch (mode) {
>>> +    case RMAP_MODE_PTE:
>>> +        do {
>>> +            first = atomic_inc_and_test(&page->_mapcount);
>>> +            if (first && folio_test_large(folio)) {
>>> +                first = atomic_inc_return_relaxed(mapped);
>>> +                first = (first < COMPOUND_MAPPED);
>>> +            }
>>> +
>>> +            if (first)
>>> +                nr++;
>>> +        } while (page++, --nr_pages > 0);
>>> +        break;
>>> +    case RMAP_MODE_PMD:
>>> +        first = atomic_inc_and_test(&folio->_entire_mapcount);
>>> +        if (first) {
>>> +            nr = atomic_add_return_relaxed(COMPOUND_MAPPED, mapped);
>>> +            if (likely(nr < COMPOUND_MAPPED + COMPOUND_MAPPED)) {
>>> +                *nr_pmdmapped = folio_nr_pages(folio);
>>> +                nr = *nr_pmdmapped - (nr & FOLIO_PAGES_MAPPED);
>>> +                /* Raced ahead of a remove and another add? */
>>> +                if (unlikely(nr < 0))
>>> +                    nr = 0;
>>> +            } else {
>>> +                /* Raced ahead of a remove of COMPOUND_MAPPED */
>>> +                nr = 0;
>>> +            }
>>> +        }
>>> +        break;
>>> +    }
>>> +    return nr;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>   /**
>>>    * folio_move_anon_rmap - move a folio to our anon_vma
>>>    * @folio:    The folio to move to our anon_vma
>>> @@ -1380,45 +1423,11 @@ static __always_inline void
>>> __folio_add_file_rmap(struct folio *folio,
>>>           struct page *page, int nr_pages, struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>>>           enum rmap_mode mode)
>>>   {
>>> -    atomic_t *mapped = &folio->_nr_pages_mapped;
>>> -    unsigned int nr_pmdmapped = 0, first;
>>> -    int nr = 0;
>>> +    unsigned int nr, nr_pmdmapped = 0;
>>
>> You're still being inconsistent with signed/unsigned here. Is there a reason
>> these can't be signed like nr_pages in the interface?
> 
> I can turn them into signed values.
> 
> Personally, I think it's misleading to use "signed" for values that have
> absolutely no meaning for negative meaning. But sure, we can be consistent, at
> least in rmap code.
> 

Well it's an easy way to detect overflow? But I know what you mean. There are
lots of other APIs that accept signed/unsigned 32/64 bits; It's a mess. It would
be a tiny step in the right direction if a series could at least be consistent
with itself though, IMHO. :)