[PATCH v4 12/17] mm/huge_memory: mark folio as accessed more accurately on split

[Kairui Song via B4 Relay <devnull+kasong.tencent.com@kernel.org>]

From: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>

The behavior of updating the folio's access info isn't consistent for
huge mapping splitting or ordinary unmapping. The page table's young
flag has to be translated into folio's access info.

Right now it only check and set folio's referenced flag, which isn't
enough since folio flags update on access have its rules. Ordinary
unmapping (zapping) calls folio_mark_accessed(), and it also checks
if the VMA has recency to avoid false updates.

So first just use the right helper here to be more consistent.

Tested-by: zhaozhengzhuo <zhaozhengzhuo@uniontech.com>
Signed-off-by: Kairui Song <kasong@tencent.com>
---
 mm/huge_memory.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/mm/huge_memory.c b/mm/huge_memory.c
index bd44d58e8684..1e2b6448c010 100644
--- a/mm/huge_memory.c
+++ b/mm/huge_memory.c
@@ -3093,8 +3093,8 @@ static void __split_huge_pud_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pud_t *pud,
 
 	if (!folio_test_dirty(folio) && pud_dirty(old_pud))
 		folio_mark_dirty(folio);
-	if (!folio_test_referenced(folio) && pud_young(old_pud))
-		folio_set_referenced(folio);
+	if (pud_young(old_pud) && vma_has_recency(vma))
+		folio_mark_accessed(folio);
 	folio_remove_rmap_pud(folio, page, vma);
 	add_mm_counter(vma->vm_mm, mm_counter_file(folio),
 		-HPAGE_PUD_NR);
@@ -3216,8 +3216,8 @@ static void __split_huge_pmd_locked(struct vm_area_struct *vma, pmd_t *pmd,
 			folio = page_folio(page);
 			if (!folio_test_dirty(folio) && pmd_dirty(old_pmd))
 				folio_mark_dirty(folio);
-			if (!folio_test_referenced(folio) && pmd_young(old_pmd))
-				folio_set_referenced(folio);
+			if (pmd_young(old_pmd) && vma_has_recency(vma))
+				folio_mark_accessed(folio);
 			folio_remove_rmap_pmd(folio, page, vma);
 			add_mm_counter(mm, mm_counter_file(folio), -HPAGE_PMD_NR);
 			folio_put(folio);

-- 
2.56.0