Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm/page_alloc: rename FPI_TRYLOCK -> FPI_NOLOCK

"Zi Yan" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.linux-rt-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kvack.linux-mm
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Fri Jul 10, 2026 at 8:40 AM EDT, Vlastimil Babka (SUSE) wrote:
> On 7/10/26 12:42, Brendan Jackman wrote:
>> As discussed in the linked patch, the there is some inconsistency between
>> "trylock" and "nolock" nomenclature, let's align it. Since "nolock" is
>> used in the public API it seems to have more mindshare so do that.
>> 
>> The linked patch did this for the ALLOC_ flag but forgot about FPI_.
>> 
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>> Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman <[email protected]>
>
> Naming things is hard. Maybe it should have all been called "nospin". I
> don't know anymore :)
> _nolock() functions and ALLOC_NOLOCK are part of API, FPI_ is internal so
> it's not that urgent. Furthermore:

I had a similar concern when reading ALLOC_TRYLOCK -> ALLOC_NOLOCK[1],
since the name is _NOLOCK, but the comment says spin_trylock.

I agree that "nospin" is better and less confusing. But whether we want
to churn it again, TBD. :)

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>
>> ---
>>  mm/page_alloc.c | 18 +++++++++---------
>>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> index 5fe1c11f919d7..ba8d882072de5 100644
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ typedef int __bitwise fpi_t;
>>  #define FPI_TO_TAIL		((__force fpi_t)BIT(1))
>>  
>>  /* Free the page without taking locks. Rely on trylock only. */
>
> here's a "trylock"
>
>> -#define FPI_TRYLOCK		((__force fpi_t)BIT(2))
>> +#define FPI_NOLOCK		((__force fpi_t)BIT(2))
>
> And here's not anymore.
>
>>  
>>  /* free_pages_prepare() has already been called for page(s) being freed. */
>>  #define FPI_PREPARED		((__force fpi_t)BIT(3))
>> @@ -1419,7 +1419,7 @@ static __always_inline bool __free_pages_prepare(struct page *page,
>>  	page_table_check_free(page, order);
>>  	pgalloc_tag_sub(page, 1 << order);
>>  
>> -	if (!PageHighMem(page) && !(fpi_flags & FPI_TRYLOCK)) {
>> +	if (!PageHighMem(page) && !(fpi_flags & FPI_NOLOCK)) {
>>  		debug_check_no_locks_freed(page_address(page),
>>  					   PAGE_SIZE << order);
>>  		debug_check_no_obj_freed(page_address(page),
>> @@ -1558,7 +1558,7 @@ static void free_one_page(struct zone *zone, struct page *page,
>>  	struct llist_head *llhead;
>>  	unsigned long flags;
>>  
>> -	if (unlikely(fpi_flags & FPI_TRYLOCK)) {
>> +	if (unlikely(fpi_flags & FPI_NOLOCK)) {
>>  		if (!spin_trylock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags)) {
>>  			add_page_to_zone_llist(zone, page, order);
>>  			return;
>> @@ -1569,7 +1569,7 @@ static void free_one_page(struct zone *zone, struct page *page,
>>  
>>  	/* The lock succeeded. Process deferred pages. */
>>  	llhead = &zone->trylock_free_pages;
>> -	if (unlikely(!llist_empty(llhead) && !(fpi_flags & FPI_TRYLOCK))) {
>> +	if (unlikely(!llist_empty(llhead) && !(fpi_flags & FPI_NOLOCK))) {
>>  		struct llist_node *llnode;
>>  		struct page *p, *tmp;
>>  
>> @@ -2882,7 +2882,7 @@ static bool free_frozen_page_commit(struct zone *zone,
>>  	if (pcp->free_count < (batch << CONFIG_PCP_BATCH_SCALE_MAX))
>>  		pcp->free_count += (1 << order);
>>  
>> -	if (unlikely(fpi_flags & FPI_TRYLOCK)) {
>> +	if (unlikely(fpi_flags & FPI_NOLOCK)) {
>>  		/*
>>  		 * Do not attempt to take a zone lock. Let pcp->count get
>>  		 * over high mark temporarily.
>> @@ -2979,7 +2979,7 @@ static void __free_frozen_pages(struct page *page, unsigned int order,
>>  		migratetype = MIGRATE_MOVABLE;
>>  	}
>>  
>> -	if (unlikely((fpi_flags & FPI_TRYLOCK) && !can_spin_trylock())) {
>> +	if (unlikely((fpi_flags & FPI_NOLOCK) && !can_spin_trylock())) {
>
> can_spin_trylock() was matched with FPI_TRYLOCK, now not anymore
>
>>  		add_page_to_zone_llist(zone, page, order);
>>  		return;
>>  	}
>> @@ -3001,7 +3001,7 @@ void free_frozen_pages(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
>>  
>>  void free_frozen_pages_nolock(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
>>  {
>> -	__free_frozen_pages(page, order, FPI_TRYLOCK);
>> +	__free_frozen_pages(page, order, FPI_NOLOCK);
>>  }
>>  
>>  /*
>> @@ -5409,7 +5409,7 @@ struct page *__alloc_frozen_pages_noprof(gfp_t gfp, unsigned int order,
>>  	if (memcg_kmem_online() && (gfp & __GFP_ACCOUNT) && page &&
>>  	    unlikely(__memcg_kmem_charge_page(page, gfp, order) != 0)) {
>>  		__free_frozen_pages(page, order,
>> -				    alloc_flags & ALLOC_NOLOCK ? FPI_TRYLOCK : 0);
>> +				    alloc_flags & ALLOC_NOLOCK ? FPI_NOLOCK : 0);
>
> Although here it does improve things. Sigh.
>
>>  		page = NULL;
>>  	}
>>  
>> @@ -5532,7 +5532,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__free_pages);
>>   */
>>  void free_pages_nolock(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
>>  {
>> -	___free_pages(page, order, FPI_TRYLOCK);
>> +	___free_pages(page, order, FPI_NOLOCK);
>>  }
>>  
>>  /**
>> 




-- 
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.