diff --git a/mm/memory.c b/mm/memory.c
index f745f5e28f0c..5d5a2d81f05a 100644
--- a/mm/memory.c
+++ b/mm/memory.c
@@ -3727,19 +3727,86 @@ static vm_fault_t wp_page_shared(struct vm_fault *vmf, struct folio *folio)
 	return ret;
 }
 
-static bool wp_can_reuse_anon_folio(struct folio *folio,
-				    struct vm_area_struct *vma)
+#ifdef CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE
+static bool __wp_can_reuse_large_anon_folio(struct folio *folio,
+		struct vm_area_struct *vma)
 {
+	bool exclusive = false;
+
+	/* Let's just free up a large folio if only a single page is mapped. */
+	if (folio_large_mapcount(folio) <= 1)
+		return false;
+
 	/*
-	 * We could currently only reuse a subpage of a large folio if no
-	 * other subpages of the large folios are still mapped. However,
-	 * let's just consistently not reuse subpages even if we could
-	 * reuse in that scenario, and give back a large folio a bit
-	 * sooner.
+	 * The assumption for anonymous folios is that each page can only get
+	 * mapped once into each MM. The only exception are KSM folios, which
+	 * are always small.
+	 *
+	 * Each taken mapcount must be paired with exactly one taken reference,
+	 * whereby the refcount must be incremented before the mapcount when
+	 * mapping a page, and the refcount must be decremented after the
+	 * mapcount when unmapping a page.
+	 *
+	 * If all folio references are from mappings, and all mappings are in
+	 * the page tables of this MM, then this folio is exclusive to this MM.
 	 */
-	if (folio_test_large(folio))
+	if (folio_test_large_maybe_mapped_shared(folio))
+		return false;
+
+	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_test_ksm(folio));
+	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_mapcount(folio) > folio_nr_pages(folio));
+	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_entire_mapcount(folio));
+
+	if (unlikely(folio_test_swapcache(folio))) {
+		/*
+		 * Note: freeing up the swapcache will fail if some PTEs are
+		 * still swap entries.
+		 */
+		if (!folio_trylock(folio))
+			return false;
+		folio_free_swap(folio);
+		folio_unlock(folio);
+	}
+
+	if (folio_large_mapcount(folio) != folio_ref_count(folio))
 		return false;
 
+	/* Stabilize the mapcount vs. refcount and recheck. */
+	folio_lock_large_mapcount(folio);
+	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_large_mapcount(folio) < folio_ref_count(folio));
+
+	if (folio_test_large_maybe_mapped_shared(folio))
+		goto unlock;
+	if (folio_large_mapcount(folio) != folio_ref_count(folio))
+		goto unlock;
+
+	VM_WARN_ON_ONCE(folio_mm_id(folio, 0) != vma->vm_mm->mm_id &&
+			folio_mm_id(folio, 1) != vma->vm_mm->mm_id);
+
+	/*
+	 * Do we need the folio lock? Likely not. If there would have been
+	 * references from page migration/swapout, we would have detected
+	 * an additional folio reference and never ended up here.
+	 */
+	exclusive = true;
+unlock:
+	folio_unlock_large_mapcount(folio);
+	return exclusive;
+}
+#else /* !CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE */
+static bool __wp_can_reuse_large_anon_folio(struct folio *folio,
+		struct vm_area_struct *vma)
+{
+	BUILD_BUG();
+}
+#endif /* CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE */
+
+static bool wp_can_reuse_anon_folio(struct folio *folio,
+				    struct vm_area_struct *vma)
+{
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_TRANSPARENT_HUGEPAGE) && folio_test_large(folio))
+		return __wp_can_reuse_large_anon_folio(folio, vma);
+
 	/*
 	 * We have to verify under folio lock: these early checks are
 	 * just an optimization to avoid locking the folio and freeing