On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 03:23:27PM -0600, Nico Pache wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 12:59 PM Lorenzo Stoakes
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 08:47:12PM -0600, Nico Pache wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 1:00 PM Lorenzo Stoakes
> > > > Right, well I agree if we can make this 0/511 thing work, let's do that.
> > >
> > > Ok, great, some consensus! I will go ahead with that solution.
> >
> > :) awesome.
> >
> > >
> > > Just to make sure we are all on the same page,
> >
> > I am still stabilising my understanding of the creep issue, see the thread
> > where David kindly + patiently goes in detail, I think I am at a
> > (pre-examining algorithm itself) broad understanding of this.
>
> I added some details of the creep issue in my other replies, hopefully
> that also helps!
>
> >
> > >
> > > the max_ptes_none value will be treated as 0 for anything other than
> > > PMD collapse, or in the case of 511. Or will the max_ptes_none only
> > > work for mTHP collapse when it is 0.
> >
> > 511 implies always collapse zero/none, 0 implies never, as I understand it.
>
> 0 implies only collapse if a given mTHP size is fully occupied by
> present PTES. Since we start at PMD and work our way down we will
> always end up with a PMD range of fully occupied mTHPs, potentially of
> all different sizes.
Yeah this was my understanding, I mean terminology is tricky here (+ I am
probably not being entirely clear tbh), so I mean less so '0 means no
collapse' but rather '0 means no collapse of zero/none' but of course can
allow for collapse of present PTEs (within the same VMA).
>
> >
> > >
> > > static unsigned int collapse_max_ptes_none(unsigned int order, bool
> > > full_scan)
> > > {
> > > unsigned int max_ptes_none;
> > >
> > > /* ignore max_ptes_none limits */
> > > if (full_scan)
> > > return HPAGE_PMD_NR - 1;
> > >
> > > if (order == HPAGE_PMD_ORDER)
> > > return khugepaged_max_ptes_none;
> > >
> > > if (khugepaged_max_ptes_none != HPAGE_PMD_NR - 1)
> > > return 0;
> > >
> > > return max_ptes_none >> (HPAGE_PMD_ORDER - order);
> > > }
> > >
> > > Here's the implementation for the first approach, looks like Baolin
> > > was able to catch up and beat me to the other solution while I was
> > > mulling over the thread lol
> >
> > Broadly looks similar to Baolin's, I made some suggestions over there
> > though!
>
> Thanks! They are both based on my current collapse_max_ptes_none! Just
> a slight difference in behavior surrounding the two suggested
> solutions by David.
Yes which is convenient as it's less delta for you!
>
> I will still have to implement the logic for not attempting mTHP
> collapses if it is any intermediate value (i.e. the function returns
> -EINVAL).
Ack
>
> -- Nico
>
> >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > -- Nico
> >
> > Thanks, Lorenzo
> >
>
Cheers, Lorenzo
