Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] mm/page_alloc: Optimize __free_contig_frozen_range()

From: David Hildenbrand (Arm)

Date: Wed Mar 25 2026 - 06:17:11 EST


On 3/24/26 16:06, Zi Yan wrote:
> On 24 Mar 2026, at 9:35, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote:
>
>> Apply the same batch-freeing optimization from free_contig_range() to the
>> frozen page path. The previous __free_contig_frozen_range() freed each
>> order-0 page individually via free_frozen_pages(), which is slow for the
>> same reason the old free_contig_range() was: each page goes to the
>> order-0 pcp list rather than being coalesced into higher-order blocks.
>>
>> Rewrite __free_contig_frozen_range() to call free_pages_prepare() for
>> each order-0 page, then batch the prepared pages into the largest
>> possible power-of-2 aligned chunks via free_prepared_contig_range().
>> If free_pages_prepare() fails (e.g. HWPoison, bad page) the page is
>> deliberately not freed; it should not be returned to the allocator.
>>
>> I've tested CMA through debugfs. The test allocates 16384 pages per
>> allocation for several iterations. There is 3.5x improvement.
>>
>> Before: 1406 usec per iteration
>> After: 402 usec per iteration
>>
>> Before:
>>
>> 70.89% 0.69% cma [kernel.kallsyms] [.] free_contig_frozen_range
>> |
>> |--70.20%--free_contig_frozen_range
>> | |
>> | |--46.41%--__free_frozen_pages
>> | | |
>> | | --36.18%--free_frozen_page_commit
>> | | |
>> | | --29.63%--_raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore
>> | |
>> | |--8.76%--_raw_spin_trylock
>> | |
>> | |--7.03%--__preempt_count_dec_and_test
>> | |
>> | |--4.57%--_raw_spin_unlock
>> | |
>> | |--1.96%--__get_pfnblock_flags_mask.isra.0
>> | |
>> | --1.15%--free_frozen_page_commit
>> |
>> --0.69%--el0t_64_sync
>>
>> After:
>>
>> 23.57% 0.00% cma [kernel.kallsyms] [.] free_contig_frozen_range
>> |
>> ---free_contig_frozen_range
>> |
>> |--20.45%--__free_contig_frozen_range
>> | |
>> | |--17.77%--free_pages_prepare
>> | |
>> | --0.72%--free_prepared_contig_range
>> | |
>> | --0.55%--__free_frozen_pages
>> |
>> --3.12%--free_pages_prepare
>>
>> Suggested-by: Zi Yan <ziy@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Muhammad Usama Anjum <usama.anjum@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> Changes since v2:
>> - Rework the loop to check for memory sections just like __free_contig_range()
>> - Didn't add reviewed-by tags because of rework
>> ---
>> mm/page_alloc.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> index 250cc07e547b8..26eac35ef73bd 100644
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -7038,8 +7038,30 @@ static int __alloc_contig_verify_gfp_mask(gfp_t gfp_mask, gfp_t *gfp_cc_mask)
>>
>> static void __free_contig_frozen_range(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages)
>> {
>> - for (; nr_pages--; pfn++)
>> - free_frozen_pages(pfn_to_page(pfn), 0);
>> + struct page *page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
>> + struct page *start = NULL;
>> + unsigned long start_sec;
>> + unsigned long i;
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++, page++) {
>> + if (!free_pages_prepare(page, 0)) {
>> + if (start) {
>> + free_prepared_contig_range(start, page - start);
>> + start = NULL;
>> + }
>> + } else if (start &&
>> + memdesc_section(page->flags) != start_sec) {
>> + free_prepared_contig_range(start, page - start);
>> + start = page;
>> + start_sec = memdesc_section(page->flags);
>> + } else if (!start) {
>> + start = page;
>> + start_sec = memdesc_section(page->flags);
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>> + if (start)
>> + free_prepared_contig_range(start, page - start);
>> }
>
> This looks almost the same as __free_contig_range().
>
> Two approaches to deduplicate the code:
>
> 1. __free_contig_range() first does put_page_testzero()
> on all pages and call __free_contig_frozen_range()
> on the range, __free_contig_frozen_range() will need
> to skip not frozen pages. It is not ideal.

Right, let's not do that.

>
> 2. add a helper function
> __free_contig_range_common(unsigned long pfn,
> unsigned long nr_pages, bool is_page_frozen),
> and
> a. call __free_contig_range_common(..., /*is_page_frozen=*/ false)
> in __free_contig_range(),
> b. __free_contig_range_common(..., /*is_page_frozen=*/ true)
> in __free_contig_frozen_range().
>

As long as it's an internal helper, that makes sense. I wouldn't want to
expose the bool in the external interface.

Thanks!

--
Cheers,

David