On 8 Aug 2025, at 11:24, Zi Yan wrote:
On 7 Aug 2025, at 23:15, Wei Yang wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 01:05:09PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote:
On 7 Aug 2025, at 4:55, Wei Yang wrote:
On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 10:20:43PM -0400, Zi Yan wrote: [...]
if (in_folio_offset < 0 ||in_folio_offset >= folio_nr_pages(folio)) {
if (in_folio_offset < 0 || in_folio_offset >= nr_pages) { if (!split_folio_to_order(folio, target_order)) split++;
struct page *split_at = folio_page(folio,in_folio_offset);if (!folio_split(folio, target_order, split_at, NULL))
struct page *split_at =folio_page(folio, in_folio_offset);if (!folio_split(folio, target_order, split_at, NULL)) { split++;addr += PAGE_SIZE * nr_pages;}Are we sure addr points to the folio start?
David pointed it out. Will use addr += PAGE_SIZE * (nr_pages - 1).
No, let me be more clear. I am talking about the addr in next iteration. I am talking about the addr in this round.
For an addr in the middle of 2M, we still could get the large folio if my understanding is correct. Then (addr + whole folio size) seems wrong.
addr | v +-------------------+ | | +-------------------+Not sure this would be the case.
Got it. addr should be aligned up to PAGE_SIZE * nr_pages to get to the next folio. Thanks.
On a second thought, this new stepping would mess up with PTE-mapped folio split. I will drop this patch (pr_debug part will be moved to Patch 1) and change split_huge_page_test.c instead.
-- Best Regards, Yan, Zi