Ackerley Tng wrote:
> Refactor dequeue_hugetlb_folio() and alloc_surplus_hugetlb_folio() to
> take mpol, nid and nodemask. This decouples allocation of a folio from
> a vma.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Change-Id: I890fb46fe8c6349383d8cf89befc68a4994eb416
> ---
> mm/hugetlb.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------------------
> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-)
>
[snip]
>
> @@ -2993,6 +2974,11 @@ struct folio *alloc_hugetlb_folio(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> int ret, idx;
> struct hugetlb_cgroup *h_cg = NULL;
> gfp_t gfp = htlb_alloc_mask(h) | __GFP_RETRY_MAYFAIL;
> + struct mempolicy *mpol;
> + nodemask_t *nodemask;
> + gfp_t gfp_mask;
> + pgoff_t ilx;
> + int nid;
>
> idx = hstate_index(h);
>
> @@ -3032,7 +3018,6 @@ struct folio *alloc_hugetlb_folio(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
>
> subpool_reservation_exists = npages_req == 0;
> }
> -
> reservation_exists = vma_reservation_exists || subpool_reservation_exists;
>
> /*
> @@ -3048,21 +3033,30 @@ struct folio *alloc_hugetlb_folio(struct vm_area_struct *vma,
> goto out_subpool_put;
> }
>
> + mpol = get_vma_policy(vma, addr, h->order, &ilx);
Why does the memory policy need to be acquired here instead of after the
cgroup charge? AFAICT this is not needed and would at least eliminate 1
of the error conditions puts.
> +
> ret = hugetlb_cgroup_charge_cgroup(idx, pages_per_huge_page(h), &h_cg);
> - if (ret)
> + if (ret) {
> + mpol_cond_put(mpol);
^^^^
here
All that said I think the use of some new cleanup macros could really help
a lot of this code.
What do folks in this area of the kernel think of those?
Ira
[snip]
