Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] mm/memory_hotplug: optimize memory hotplug

[Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@oracle.com>]

> This should be a separate patch IMHO. It is an optimization on its
> own. The original code tries to be sparse neutral but we do depend on
> sparse anyway.

Yes, Mingo already asked me to split this patch. I've done just that
and will send it out soon.

>
> [...]
>>  /* register memory section under specified node if it spans that node */
>> -int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk, int nid)
>> +int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk, int nid,
>> +                              bool check_nid)
>
> This check_nid begs for a documentation. When do we need to set it? I
> can see that register_new_memory path doesn't check node id. It is quite
> reasonable to expect that a new memblock doesn't span multiple numa
> nodes which can be the case for register_one_node but a word or two are
> really due.

OK, I will add a comment, and BTW, this is also going to be a separate
patch for ease of review.

>
>>  {
>>       int ret;
>>       unsigned long pfn, sect_start_pfn, sect_end_pfn;
>> @@ -423,11 +424,13 @@ int register_mem_sect_under_node(struct memory_block *mem_blk, int nid)
>>                       continue;
>>               }
>>
>> -             page_nid = get_nid_for_pfn(pfn);
>> -             if (page_nid < 0)
>> -                     continue;
>> -             if (page_nid != nid)
>> -                     continue;
>> +             if (check_nid) {
>> +                     page_nid = get_nid_for_pfn(pfn);
>> +                     if (page_nid < 0)
>> +                             continue;
>> +                     if (page_nid != nid)
>> +                             continue;
>> +             }
>>               ret = sysfs_create_link_nowarn(&node_devices[nid]->dev.kobj,
>>                                       &mem_blk->dev.kobj,
>>                                       kobject_name(&mem_blk->dev.kobj));
>> @@ -502,7 +505,7 @@ int link_mem_sections(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long nr_pages)
>>
>>               mem_blk = find_memory_block_hinted(mem_sect, mem_blk);
>>
>> -             ret = register_mem_sect_under_node(mem_blk, nid);
>> +             ret = register_mem_sect_under_node(mem_blk, nid, true);
>>               if (!err)
>>                       err = ret;
>>
>
> I would be tempted to split this into a separate patch as well. The
> review will be much easier.

Yes, but that would be the last patch in the series.

> This is quite ugly. You allocate 256MB for small numa systems and 512MB
> for larger NUMAs unconditionally for MEMORY_HOTPLUG. I see you need it
> to safely replace page_to_nid by get_section_nid but this is just too
> high of the price. Please note that this shouldn't be really needed. At
> least not for onlining. We already _do_ know the node association with
> the pfn range. So we should be able to get the nid from memblock.

OK, I will think for a different place to store nid temporarily, or
how to get it.

Thank you,
Pavel