Re: [PATCH RFC 12/35] mm: limit folio/compound page sizes in problematic kernel configs

Zi Yan <[email protected]>
Newsgroups com.zx2c4.lists.wireguard,dev.linux.lists.iommu,dev.linux.lists.virtualization,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.freedesktop.lists.intel-gfx,org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel,org.infradead.lists.linux-riscv,org.kernel.vger.io-uring,org.kernel.vger.kvm,org.kernel.vger.linux-crypto,org.kernel.vger.linux-ide,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kselftest,org.kernel.vger.linux-mips,org.kernel.vger.linux-mmc,org.kernel.vger.linux-s390,org.kernel.vger.linux-scsi,org.kernel.vger.netdev,org.kvack.linux-mm
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 21 Aug 2025, at 16:49, David Hildenbrand wrote:

> On 21.08.25 22:46, Zi Yan wrote:
>> On 21 Aug 2025, at 16:06, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>
>>> Let's limit the maximum folio size in problematic kernel config where
>>> the memmap is allocated per memory section (SPARSEMEM without
>>> SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP) to a single memory section.
>>>
>>> Currently, only a single architectures supports ARCH_HAS_GIGANTIC_PAGE
>>> but not SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP: sh.
>>>
>>> Fortunately, the biggest hugetlb size sh supports is 64 MiB
>>> (HUGETLB_PAGE_SIZE_64MB) and the section size is at least 64 MiB
>>> (SECTION_SIZE_BITS == 26), so their use case is not degraded.
>>>
>>> As folios and memory sections are naturally aligned to their order-2 size
>>> in memory, consequently a single folio can no longer span multiple memory
>>> sections on these problematic kernel configs.
>>>
>>> nth_page() is no longer required when operating within a single compound
>>> page / folio.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>>   include/linux/mm.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++++----
>>>   1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h
>>> index 77737cbf2216a..48a985e17ef4e 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/mm.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h
>>> @@ -2053,11 +2053,25 @@ static inline long folio_nr_pages(const struct folio *folio)
>>>   	return folio_large_nr_pages(folio);
>>>   }
>>>
>>> -/* Only hugetlbfs can allocate folios larger than MAX_ORDER */
>>> -#ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_GIGANTIC_PAGE
>>> -#define MAX_FOLIO_ORDER		PUD_ORDER
>>> -#else
>>> +#if !defined(CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_GIGANTIC_PAGE)
>>> +/*
>>> + * We don't expect any folios that exceed buddy sizes (and consequently
>>> + * memory sections).
>>> + */
>>>   #define MAX_FOLIO_ORDER		MAX_PAGE_ORDER
>>> +#elif defined(CONFIG_SPARSEMEM) && !defined(CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP)
>>> +/*
>>> + * Only pages within a single memory section are guaranteed to be
>>> + * contiguous. By limiting folios to a single memory section, all folio
>>> + * pages are guaranteed to be contiguous.
>>> + */
>>> +#define MAX_FOLIO_ORDER		PFN_SECTION_SHIFT
>>> +#else
>>> +/*
>>> + * There is no real limit on the folio size. We limit them to the maximum we
>>> + * currently expect.
>>
>> The comment about hugetlbfs is helpful here, since the other folios are still
>> limited by buddy allocator’s MAX_ORDER.
>
> Yeah, but the old comment was wrong (there is DAX).
>
> I can add here "currently expect (e.g., hugetlfs, dax)."

Sounds good.

Best Regards,
Yan, Zi
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.