From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933002AbdDEPoM (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Apr 2017 11:44:12 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:56029 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932829AbdDEPnF (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Apr 2017 11:43:05 -0400 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 17:42:59 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Reza Arbab Cc: Mel Gorman , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Vlastimil Babka , Andrea Arcangeli , Yasuaki Ishimatsu , Tang Chen , qiuxishi@huawei.com, Kani Toshimitsu , slaoub@gmail.com, Joonsoo Kim , Andi Kleen , Zhang Zhen , David Rientjes , Daniel Kiper , Igor Mammedov , Vitaly Kuznetsov , LKML , Chris Metcalf , Dan Williams , Heiko Carstens , Lai Jiangshan , Martin Schwidefsky Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] mm: make movable onlining suck less Message-ID: <20170405154258.GR6035@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170404073412.GC15132@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170404082302.GE15132@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170404160239.ftvuxklioo6zvuxl@arbab-laptop> <20170404164452.GQ15132@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170404183012.a6biape5y7vu6cjm@arbab-laptop> <20170404194122.GS15132@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170404214339.6o4c4uhwudyhzbbo@arbab-laptop> <20170405064239.GB6035@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170405092427.GG6035@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170405145304.wxzfavqxnyqtrlru@arbab-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170405145304.wxzfavqxnyqtrlru@arbab-laptop> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed 05-04-17 09:53:05, Reza Arbab wrote: [...] > I hope this made sense. :/ yes it certainly helped me to make some picture of your setup. I will keep thinking about that. But one thing that is really bugging me is how could you see low pfns in the previous oops. Please drop the last patch and sprinkle printks down the remove_memory path to see where this all go south. I believe that there is something in the initialization code lurking in my code. Please also scratch the pfn_valid check in online_pages diff. It will not help here. I suspect I broke some hidden expectation that made add_memory vs. remove_memory more symetric before. I will keep digging. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr0-f198.google.com (mail-wr0-f198.google.com [209.85.128.198]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6DB216B0038 for ; Wed, 5 Apr 2017 11:43:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-wr0-f198.google.com with SMTP id w96so2282303wrb.13 for ; Wed, 05 Apr 2017 08:43:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de. [195.135.220.15]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id c6si24878789wmd.77.2017.04.05.08.43.04 for (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Apr 2017 08:43:04 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 17:42:59 +0200 From: Michal Hocko Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] mm: make movable onlining suck less Message-ID: <20170405154258.GR6035@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20170404073412.GC15132@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170404082302.GE15132@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170404160239.ftvuxklioo6zvuxl@arbab-laptop> <20170404164452.GQ15132@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170404183012.a6biape5y7vu6cjm@arbab-laptop> <20170404194122.GS15132@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170404214339.6o4c4uhwudyhzbbo@arbab-laptop> <20170405064239.GB6035@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170405092427.GG6035@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170405145304.wxzfavqxnyqtrlru@arbab-laptop> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170405145304.wxzfavqxnyqtrlru@arbab-laptop> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Reza Arbab Cc: Mel Gorman , linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Vlastimil Babka , Andrea Arcangeli , Yasuaki Ishimatsu , Tang Chen , qiuxishi@huawei.com, Kani Toshimitsu , slaoub@gmail.com, Joonsoo Kim , Andi Kleen , Zhang Zhen , David Rientjes , Daniel Kiper , Igor Mammedov , Vitaly Kuznetsov , LKML , Chris Metcalf , Dan Williams , Heiko Carstens , Lai Jiangshan , Martin Schwidefsky On Wed 05-04-17 09:53:05, Reza Arbab wrote: [...] > I hope this made sense. :/ yes it certainly helped me to make some picture of your setup. I will keep thinking about that. But one thing that is really bugging me is how could you see low pfns in the previous oops. Please drop the last patch and sprinkle printks down the remove_memory path to see where this all go south. I believe that there is something in the initialization code lurking in my code. Please also scratch the pfn_valid check in online_pages diff. It will not help here. I suspect I broke some hidden expectation that made add_memory vs. remove_memory more symetric before. I will keep digging. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org