On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 06:03:39PM -0400, Gregory Price wrote: > On Tue, May 12, 2026 at 05:06:37PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > Add a gfp_t parameter to alloc_hugetlb_folio(). When __GFP_ZERO > > is set, the function guarantees the returned folio is zeroed: > > - Fresh allocations (buddy or gigantic): zeroed by > > post_alloc_hook via __GFP_ZERO. > > - Pool pages with HPG_zeroed set: already zeroed, skip. > > - Pool pages without HPG_zeroed: zeroed via folio_zero_user(). > > > > The address parameter is renamed to user_addr; the function > > aligns it internally for reservation and NUMA policy lookups. > > For pool pages that need zeroing, user_addr is passed to > > folio_zero_user() for cache-friendly zeroing near the faulting > > subpage. All callers pass a page-aligned address; the > > hugetlb_no_page caller passes vmf->real_address & PAGE_MASK > > for consistency. > > > > HPG_zeroed (stored in hugetlb folio->private bits) tracks > > known-zero pool pages. It is set when alloc_surplus_hugetlb_folio > > allocates with __GFP_ZERO, and cleared in free_huge_folio when > > the page returns to the pool after userspace use. > > > > Suggested-by: Gregory Price <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <[email protected]> > > Assisted-by: Claude:claude-opus-4-6 > > Assisted-by: cursor-agent:GPT-5.4-xhigh > > --- > > fs/hugetlbfs/inode.c | 3 +-- > > include/linux/hugetlb.h | 5 ++++- > > mm/hugetlb.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- > > 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > This seems much much cleaner this way. One nit, doesn't need a respin > unless you feel like it. > > Reviewed-by: Gregory Price <[email protected]> > > > > @@ -2980,6 +2993,11 @@ struct folio *alloc_hugetlb_folio(struct > > vm_area_struct *vma, > > > > spin_unlock_irq(&hugetlb_lock); > > > > + if ((gfp & __GFP_ZERO) && from_pool && > > + !folio_test_hugetlb_zeroed(folio)) > > stupid question: > > if (!from_pool) - wouldn't folio_test_hugetlb_zeroed(folio) be true > because __GFP_ZERO is passed? > > If not, SHOULD it be true (i.e. should we be setting that in the > non-pool allocation path when __GFP_ZERO is passed and allocation > succeeds?) > > If so, can this just be simplified to: > > if ((gfp & __GFP_ZERO) && !folio_test_hugetlb_zeroed(folio)) > > Maybe that lets you eliminate the bool entirely? > > ~Gregory
Agreed. I will include this if I need to respin. -- MST
