On 10/9/25 17:12, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 09.10.25 06:21, Balbir Singh wrote: >> On 8/22/25 06:06, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> Let's reject them early, which in turn makes folio_alloc_gigantic() reject >>> them properly. >>> >>> To avoid converting from order to nr_pages, let's just add MAX_FOLIO_ORDER >>> and calculate MAX_FOLIO_NR_PAGES based on that. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> >>> --- >>> include/linux/mm.h | 6 ++++-- >>> mm/page_alloc.c | 5 ++++- >>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/include/linux/mm.h b/include/linux/mm.h >>> index 00c8a54127d37..77737cbf2216a 100644 >>> --- a/include/linux/mm.h >>> +++ b/include/linux/mm.h >>> @@ -2055,11 +2055,13 @@ static inline long folio_nr_pages(const struct >>> folio *folio) >>> /* Only hugetlbfs can allocate folios larger than MAX_ORDER */ >>> #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_GIGANTIC_PAGE >>> -#define MAX_FOLIO_NR_PAGES (1UL << PUD_ORDER) >>> +#define MAX_FOLIO_ORDER PUD_ORDER >> >> Do we need to check for CONTIG_ALLOC as well with >> CONFIG_ARCH_HAS_GIGANTIC_PAGE? >> > > I don't think so, can you elaborate? >
The only way to allocate a gigantic page is to use CMA, IIRC, which is covered by CONTIG_ALLOC >>> #else >>> -#define MAX_FOLIO_NR_PAGES MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES >>> +#define MAX_FOLIO_ORDER MAX_PAGE_ORDER >>> #endif >>> +#define MAX_FOLIO_NR_PAGES (1UL << MAX_FOLIO_ORDER) >>> + >>> /* >>> * compound_nr() returns the number of pages in this potentially compound >>> * page. compound_nr() can be called on a tail page, and is defined to >>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c >>> index ca9e6b9633f79..1e6ae4c395b30 100644 >>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c >>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c >>> @@ -6833,6 +6833,7 @@ static int __alloc_contig_verify_gfp_mask(gfp_t >>> gfp_mask, gfp_t *gfp_cc_mask) >>> int alloc_contig_range_noprof(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, >>> acr_flags_t alloc_flags, gfp_t gfp_mask) >>> { >>> + const unsigned int order = ilog2(end - start); >> >> Do we need a VM_WARN_ON(end < start)? > > I don't think so. > end - start being < 0, completely breaks ilog2. But we would error out because ilog2 > MAX_FOLIO_ORDER, so we should fine >> >>> unsigned long outer_start, outer_end; >>> int ret = 0; >>> @@ -6850,6 +6851,9 @@ int alloc_contig_range_noprof(unsigned long start, >>> unsigned long end, >>> PB_ISOLATE_MODE_CMA_ALLOC : >>> PB_ISOLATE_MODE_OTHER; >>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE((gfp_mask & __GFP_COMP) && order > MAX_FOLIO_ORDER)) >>> + return -EINVAL; >>> + >>> gfp_mask = current_gfp_context(gfp_mask); >>> if (__alloc_contig_verify_gfp_mask(gfp_mask, (gfp_t *)&cc.gfp_mask)) >>> return -EINVAL; >>> @@ -6947,7 +6951,6 @@ int alloc_contig_range_noprof(unsigned long start, >>> unsigned long end, >>> free_contig_range(end, outer_end - end); >>> } else if (start == outer_start && end == outer_end && >>> is_power_of_2(end - start)) { >>> struct page *head = pfn_to_page(start); >>> - int order = ilog2(end - start); >>> check_new_pages(head, order); >>> prep_new_page(head, order, gfp_mask, 0); >> >> Acked-by: Balbir Singh <balb...@nvidia.com> > > Thanks for the review, but note that this is already upstream. > Sorry, this showed up in my updated mm thread and I ended up reviewing it, please ignore if it's upstream Balbir