From: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
To: "Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)" <ljs@kernel.org>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, david@kernel.org, hughd@google.com,
ziy@nvidia.com, liam@infradead.org, nico.pache@linux.dev,
dev.jain@arm.com, ryan.roberts@arm.com, baohua@kernel.org,
lance.yang@linux.dev, usama.arif@linux.dev, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: shmem: fix incorrect vm_flags usage when checking allowable orders
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 18:54:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e4bed970-ba26-41d9-8cdb-a2f3922fbe94@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3246987a-7f99-4dcd-b3f9-50d9a8c112ff@linux.alibaba.com>
On 8/17/26 5:34 PM, Baolin Wang wrote:
>
>
> On 8/17/26 3:40 PM, Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 17, 2026 at 03:16:43PM +0800, Baolin Wang wrote:
>>> Lance reported that when MADV_HUGEPAGE is set on a tmpfs file mounted
>>> with
>>> huge=advise option, khugepaged fails the allowable order check and
>>> does not
>>> scan the tmpfs file for collapse.
>>
>> Ugh.
>>
>> But really I think this isn't quite accurate - what you mean to say I
>> think is
>> that when _nothing else_ causes the mm to be considered for khugepaged
>> collapse,
>> an MADV_HUGEPAGE-advised tmpfs VMA alone does not cause scanning to
>> commence.
>
> Yes.
>
>>> After commit 6beeab870e70 ("mm: shmem: move
>>> shmem_huge_global_enabled() into
>>> shmem_allowable_huge_orders()"), the shmem/tmpfs allowable order
>>> check reads
>>> vma->vm_flags directly. However, when MADV_HUGEPAGE is handled,
>>> khugepaged_enter_vma() is called before the VMA's vm_flags have been
>>> updated,
>>> so the check uses stale flags and incorrectly rejects the VMA for
>>> collapse.
>>> As a result, khugepaged does not collapse the tmpfs file into PMD
>>> order in time.
>>
>> Could we at least refer to the non-deprecated field in the commit
>> message?
>> i.e. vma->flags.
>>
>> Probably worth mentioning VMA_HUGEPAGE_BIT also.
>
> Sure.
>
>
>>> Fix this by passing vm_flags as a parameter to
>>> shmem_allowable_huge_orders()
>>> instead of reading it from the vm_area_struct.
>>
>> Ugh this is so disgusting.
>>
>> I understand this is a fix for a bug to be backported but couldn't we
>> just
>> achieve the same without having to add a deprecated field to be passed
>> around?
>>
>> As you say the khugepaged_enter_vma() isn't really so helpful in
>> hugepage_madvise().
>>
>> But you could add this to the bottom of madvise_update_vma():
>>
>> if (vma_flags_test(&new_vma_flags, VMA_HUGEPAGE_BIT))
>> khugepaged_enter_vma(vma, new_flags);
>>
>> I don't think this is really egregious on this code path and could go
>> some way
>> towards us eliminating the silly thing of passing around flags-to-be-set.
>
> This is not the point (maybe I didn't describe it clearly). The point is
> that the allowable orders check for tmpfs in shmem_huge_global_enabled()
> (called by shmem_allowable_huge_orders()) uses a stale vma flag.
>
> static unsigned int shmem_huge_global_enabled(struct inode *inode,
> pgoff_t index,
> loff_t write_end, bool shmem_huge_force,
> struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> vm_flags_t vm_flags)
> {
> ......
> switch (SHMEM_SB(inode->i_sb)->huge) {
>
> ......
> case SHMEM_HUGE_ADVISE:
> if (vm_flags & VM_HUGEPAGE)
> return THP_ORDERS_ALL_FILE_DEFAULT;
> fallthrough;
> default:
> return 0;
> }
> }
>
> So we should pass the new vma flags for shmem_allowable_huge_orders() to
> check the allowable orders for tmpfs. Changing madvise_update_vma()
> doesn't help with the allowable orders check for tmpfs.
Sorry for misreading your code (I need a coffee before reading the email
:)). Please ignore my reply. After looking at the code again, yes, this
can work. If nobody rejects, I will follow your suggestion in v2. Thanks.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-17 10:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-17 7:16 Baolin Wang
2026-08-17 7:39 ` Lance Yang
2026-08-17 7:40 ` Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM)
2026-08-17 9:34 ` Baolin Wang
2026-08-17 10:54 ` Baolin Wang [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e4bed970-ba26-41d9-8cdb-a2f3922fbe94@linux.alibaba.com \
--to=baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baohua@kernel.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=hughd@google.com \
--cc=lance.yang@linux.dev \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=nico.pache@linux.dev \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=usama.arif@linux.dev \
--cc=ziy@nvidia.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®