From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: memory_hotplug: Remove assumption on memory
 state before hotremove
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 15:39:23 +0100
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0i7vOxwhgA1LWYDqxCKkHaYikCf_HZZQCbgApLpoyV2JA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <cover.1511433386.git.ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4e21a27570f665793debf167c8567c6752116d0a.1511433386.git.ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Return-path: <owner-linux-mm@kvack.org>
In-Reply-To: <4e21a27570f665793debf167c8567c6752116d0a.1511433386.git.ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org
To: Andrea Reale <ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>, m.bielski@virtualopensystems.com, arunks@qti.qualcomm.com, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, scott.branden@broadcom.com, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, qiuxishi@huawei.com, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>, ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Andrea Reale <ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Resending the patch adding linux-acpi in CC, as suggested by Rafael.
> Everyone else: apologies for the noise.
>
> Commit 242831eb15a0 ("Memory hotplug / ACPI: Simplify memory removal")
> introduced an assumption whereas when control
> reaches remove_memory the corresponding memory has been already
> offlined. In that case, the acpi_memhotplug was making sure that
> the assumption held.
> This assumption, however, is not necessarily true if offlining
> and removal are not done by the same "controller" (for example,
> when first offlining via sysfs).
>
> Removing this assumption for the generic remove_memory code
> and moving it in the specific acpi_memhotplug code. This is
> a dependency for the software-aided arm64 offlining and removal
> process.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Reale <ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Maciej Bielski <m.bielski@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c |  2 +-
>  include/linux/memory_hotplug.h |  9 ++++++---
>  mm/memory_hotplug.c            | 13 +++++++++----
>  3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
> index 6b0d3ef..b0126a0 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
> @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static void acpi_memory_remove_memory(struct acpi_memory_device *mem_device)
>                         nid = memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(info->start_addr);
>
>                 acpi_unbind_memory_blocks(info);
> -               remove_memory(nid, info->start_addr, info->length);
> +               BUG_ON(remove_memory(nid, info->start_addr, info->length));

Why does this have to be BUG_ON()?  Is it really necessary to kill the
system here?

If it is, please add a comment describing why continuing is not an option here.

>                 list_del(&info->list);
>                 kfree(info);
>         }

Thanks,
Rafael

--
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: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>

From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1753934AbdKXOj1 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 24 Nov 2017 09:39:27 -0500
Received: from mail-oi0-f65.google.com ([209.85.218.65]:35118 "EHLO
        mail-oi0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753498AbdKXOjY (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 24 Nov 2017 09:39:24 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZdonuZqvzpYgLWt3WKFSs8o2yqwCLV8N4HiB3ehCCUYT8/GJZaHSPj1UN4tmU4n1fZ5AtYPFyi8B7M4jiIizI=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4e21a27570f665793debf167c8567c6752116d0a.1511433386.git.ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <cover.1511433386.git.ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4e21a27570f665793debf167c8567c6752116d0a.1511433386.git.ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 15:39:23 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2-t7Fq4pyDbrVqViFOTCPlzIq7U
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0i7vOxwhgA1LWYDqxCKkHaYikCf_HZZQCbgApLpoyV2JA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: memory_hotplug: Remove assumption on memory
 state before hotremove
To: Andrea Reale <ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        m.bielski@virtualopensystems.com, arunks@qti.qualcomm.com,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, scott.branden@broadcom.com,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, qiuxishi@huawei.com,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Andrea Reale <ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Resending the patch adding linux-acpi in CC, as suggested by Rafael.
> Everyone else: apologies for the noise.
>
> Commit 242831eb15a0 ("Memory hotplug / ACPI: Simplify memory removal")
> introduced an assumption whereas when control
> reaches remove_memory the corresponding memory has been already
> offlined. In that case, the acpi_memhotplug was making sure that
> the assumption held.
> This assumption, however, is not necessarily true if offlining
> and removal are not done by the same "controller" (for example,
> when first offlining via sysfs).
>
> Removing this assumption for the generic remove_memory code
> and moving it in the specific acpi_memhotplug code. This is
> a dependency for the software-aided arm64 offlining and removal
> process.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Reale <ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Maciej Bielski <m.bielski@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c |  2 +-
>  include/linux/memory_hotplug.h |  9 ++++++---
>  mm/memory_hotplug.c            | 13 +++++++++----
>  3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
> index 6b0d3ef..b0126a0 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
> @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static void acpi_memory_remove_memory(struct acpi_memory_device *mem_device)
>                         nid = memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(info->start_addr);
>
>                 acpi_unbind_memory_blocks(info);
> -               remove_memory(nid, info->start_addr, info->length);
> +               BUG_ON(remove_memory(nid, info->start_addr, info->length));

Why does this have to be BUG_ON()?  Is it really necessary to kill the
system here?

If it is, please add a comment describing why continuing is not an option here.

>                 list_del(&info->list);
>                 kfree(info);
>         }

Thanks,
Rafael

From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: rafael@kernel.org (Rafael J. Wysocki)
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 15:39:23 +0100
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/5] mm: memory_hotplug: Remove assumption on memory
 state before hotremove
In-Reply-To: <4e21a27570f665793debf167c8567c6752116d0a.1511433386.git.ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
References: <cover.1511433386.git.ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <4e21a27570f665793debf167c8567c6752116d0a.1511433386.git.ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0i7vOxwhgA1LWYDqxCKkHaYikCf_HZZQCbgApLpoyV2JA@mail.gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Andrea Reale <ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> Resending the patch adding linux-acpi in CC, as suggested by Rafael.
> Everyone else: apologies for the noise.
>
> Commit 242831eb15a0 ("Memory hotplug / ACPI: Simplify memory removal")
> introduced an assumption whereas when control
> reaches remove_memory the corresponding memory has been already
> offlined. In that case, the acpi_memhotplug was making sure that
> the assumption held.
> This assumption, however, is not necessarily true if offlining
> and removal are not done by the same "controller" (for example,
> when first offlining via sysfs).
>
> Removing this assumption for the generic remove_memory code
> and moving it in the specific acpi_memhotplug code. This is
> a dependency for the software-aided arm64 offlining and removal
> process.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrea Reale <ar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Maciej Bielski <m.bielski@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c |  2 +-
>  include/linux/memory_hotplug.h |  9 ++++++---
>  mm/memory_hotplug.c            | 13 +++++++++----
>  3 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
> index 6b0d3ef..b0126a0 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_memhotplug.c
> @@ -282,7 +282,7 @@ static void acpi_memory_remove_memory(struct acpi_memory_device *mem_device)
>                         nid = memory_add_physaddr_to_nid(info->start_addr);
>
>                 acpi_unbind_memory_blocks(info);
> -               remove_memory(nid, info->start_addr, info->length);
> +               BUG_ON(remove_memory(nid, info->start_addr, info->length));

Why does this have to be BUG_ON()?  Is it really necessary to kill the
system here?

If it is, please add a comment describing why continuing is not an option here.

>                 list_del(&info->list);
>                 kfree(info);
>         }

Thanks,
Rafael