Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 27 Sep 2023 20:08:24 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH -next 8/9] mm: page_alloc: use a folio in free_pages_prepare() | From | Kefeng Wang <> |
| |
Hi David and all,
On 2023/9/26 17:39, Kefeng Wang wrote: > > > On 2023/9/26 15:49, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 26.09.23 02:52, Kefeng Wang wrote: >>> The page should not a tail page in free_pages_prepare(), let's use >>> a folio in free_pages_prepare() to save several compound_head() calls. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com> >>> --- >>> mm/page_alloc.c | 15 ++++++++------- >>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c >>> index 06be8821d833..a888b9d57751 100644 >>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c >>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c >>> @@ -1070,6 +1070,7 @@ static __always_inline bool >>> free_pages_prepare(struct page *page, >>> unsigned int order, fpi_t fpi_flags) >>> { >>> int bad = 0; >>> + struct folio *folio = page_folio(page); >> >> We might have higher-order pages here that are not folios (not >> compound pages). It looks a bit like this function really shouldn't be >> working with folios in the generic way, for that reason. >> >> Wrong level of abstraction in that function. > > Thanks for your point this, also the change also looks unnecessary too, > the main purpose to use a folio in this function is prepared for > converting page_cpupid_reset_last() to folio, as the higher-order pages > the next patch is not right, I will reconsider it. >
As David mentioned,free_pages_prepare should not use folio, I won't to convert page_cpupid_reset_last(), that is, only the first 7 patches are reserved, any comments about the above patches, many thanks.
| |