[PATCH v10 03/10] mm/vmalloc: use pte_set_huge()/pte_clear_huge() for PTE-level block mappings
Uladzislau Rezki
urezki at gmail.com
Sun Oct 11 07:29:55 PDT 2026
On Fri, Oct 02, 2026 at 05:09:40PM +0800, Wen Jiang wrote:
> vmap installs PTE-level block mappings by reusing set_huge_pte_at() and
> huge_ptep_get_and_clear() under #ifdef CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE. This makes
> the feature silently unavailable on CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE=n kernels and
> couples mm/vmalloc.c to HugeTLB internals it does not otherwise need.
>
> Now that arm64 and powerpc/8xx provide pte_set_huge() and
> pte_clear_huge(), add the generic fallbacks next to the existing
> pmd/pud_set_huge() family and convert vmap_pte_range() and
> vunmap_pte_range() to the new helpers. The CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE guards
> around the block-mapping paths are dropped, so PTE-level block mappings
> now also work on CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE=n kernels, and mm/vmalloc.c no
> longer includes <linux/hugetlb.h>.
>
> The fallbacks exist only to keep the build working on architectures
> without PTE-level block mapping support. They are unreachable there:
> the callers only run when arch_vmap_pte_range_map_size() or
> arch_vmap_pte_range_unmap_size() return a size other than PAGE_SIZE,
> which requires an arch implementation. BUILD_BUG() makes that
> explicit rather than silently doing nothing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wen Jiang <jiangwen6 at xiaomi.com>
> Reviewed-by: Barry Song <baohua at kernel.org>
> ---
> include/linux/pgtable.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> mm/vmalloc.c | 19 ++++++-------------
> 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/pgtable.h b/include/linux/pgtable.h
> index 8c093c119e5a8..a7fd51fec8a17 100644
> --- a/include/linux/pgtable.h
> +++ b/include/linux/pgtable.h
> @@ -2204,6 +2204,35 @@ static inline int pmd_free_pte_page(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr)
> }
> #endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_HUGE_VMAP */
>
> +/*
> + * PTE-level block mappings for vmap.
> + *
> + * pte_set_huge() only has to be implemented by architectures whose
> + * arch_vmap_pte_range_map_size() can return a size other than PAGE_SIZE.
> + */
> +#ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_SET_HUGE
> +static inline void pte_set_huge(pte_t *ptep, unsigned long addr,
> + phys_addr_t phys, pgprot_t prot,
> + unsigned long size)
> +{
> + BUILD_BUG();
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> +/*
> + * Likewise, pte_clear_huge() only has to be implemented by architectures
> + * whose arch_vmap_pte_range_unmap_size() can return a size other than
> + * PAGE_SIZE.
> + */
> +#ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_PTE_CLEAR_HUGE
> +static inline pte_t pte_clear_huge(pte_t *ptep, unsigned long addr,
> + unsigned long size)
> +{
> + BUILD_BUG();
> + return __pte(0);
> +}
> +#endif
> +
> #ifndef __HAVE_ARCH_FLUSH_PMD_TLB_RANGE
> #ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
> /*
> diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
> index bea9f76ed7e74..fb757d95bde25 100644
> --- a/mm/vmalloc.c
> +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
> @@ -38,7 +38,6 @@
> #include <linux/rbtree_augmented.h>
> #include <linux/overflow.h>
> #include <linux/pgtable.h>
> -#include <linux/hugetlb.h>
> #include <linux/sched/mm.h>
> #include <asm/tlbflush.h>
> #include <asm/shmparam.h>
> @@ -100,7 +99,7 @@ static int vmap_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
> pte_t *pte;
> u64 pfn;
> struct page *page;
> - unsigned long size = PAGE_SIZE;
> + unsigned long size;
>
> if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!PAGE_ALIGNED(end - addr)))
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -121,17 +120,12 @@ static int vmap_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
> BUG();
> }
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE
> size = arch_vmap_pte_range_map_size(addr, end, pfn, max_page_shift);
> if (size != PAGE_SIZE) {
> - pte_t entry = pfn_pte(pfn, prot);
> -
> - entry = arch_make_huge_pte(entry, ilog2(size), 0);
> - set_huge_pte_at(&init_mm, addr, pte, entry, size);
> + pte_set_huge(pte, addr, PFN_PHYS(pfn), prot, size);
>
As far as i understand, X86_64 arches do not use this path. This
specifically is only for ARM64 or powerpc. pte_set_huge() makes me
thinking about huge-page mappings(PMD/PUD/hugetlb). This helper is
about mutli page mapping on the PTE level.
Better naming? pte_set_large()?
Any thoughts?
Other then that:
Reviewed-by: Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) <urezki at gmail.com>
--
Uladzislau Rezki
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list