From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB2AC6379D for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:32:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43177206E5 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:32:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="J3ql5fhf" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728515AbgKYNcX (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:32:23 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([63.128.21.124]:34428 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725616AbgKYNcW (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:32:22 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1606311140; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=rwvgyxDfwQi/NtrjMhcIih8dqcTP9qRQY/AfpUrZ+Y4=; b=J3ql5fhfUc6nwZ8MVvFG4z2fskqHZbEcCsbLUfnIleUx7oTinzyOnTks6LUftgk9SDd01k ZI9V4uK96rufXEakleRtz3gYwJZseH5DBTbY7FFb3CfA1XKQq8hn0ferURik5TGrbeEL4j NtAfLFkZQNc0cpO6F9jWkIyHozBl/oU= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-328-a1S4rpDjO2WLmZqTpdYG5w-1; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:32:17 -0500 X-MC-Unique: a1S4rpDjO2WLmZqTpdYG5w-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 994D01012E77; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:32:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.112.131] (ovpn-112-131.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.131]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD755D9CA; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:32:03 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm: compaction: avoid fast_isolate_around() to set pageblock_skip on reserved pages To: Vlastimil Babka , Andrea Arcangeli Cc: Mel Gorman , Andrew Morton , linux-mm@kvack.org, Qian Cai , Michal Hocko , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Rapoport , Baoquan He References: <8C537EB7-85EE-4DCF-943E-3CC0ED0DF56D@lca.pw> <20201121194506.13464-1-aarcange@redhat.com> <20201121194506.13464-2-aarcange@redhat.com> <1c4c405b-52e0-cf6b-1f82-91a0a1e3dd53@suse.cz> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:32:02 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1c4c405b-52e0-cf6b-1f82-91a0a1e3dd53@suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 25.11.20 13:08, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > On 11/25/20 6:34 AM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: >> Hello, >> >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2020 at 02:01:16PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote: >>> On 11/21/20 8:45 PM, Andrea Arcangeli wrote: >>>> A corollary issue was fixed in >>>> 39639000-39814fff : Unknown E820 type >>>> >>>> pfn 0x7a200 -> 0x7a200000 min_pfn hit non-RAM: >>>> >>>> 7a17b000-7a216fff : Unknown E820 type >>> >>> It would be nice to also provide a /proc/zoneinfo and how exactly the >>> "zone_spans_pfn" was violated. I assume we end up below zone's >>> start_pfn, but is it true? >> >> Agreed, I was about to grab that info along with all page struct >> around the pfn 0x7a200 and phys address 0x7a216fff. >> >> # grep -A1 E820 /proc/iomem >> 7a17b000-7a216fff : Unknown E820 type >> 7a217000-7bffffff : System RAM >> >> DMA zone_start_pfn 1 zone_end_pfn() 4096 contiguous 1 >> DMA32 zone_start_pfn 4096 zone_end_pfn() 1048576 contiguous 0 >> Normal zone_start_pfn 1048576 zone_end_pfn() 4715392 contiguous 1 >> Movable zone_start_pfn 0 zone_end_pfn() 0 contiguous 0 > > So the above means that around the "Unknown E820 type" we have: > > pfn 499712 - start of pageblock in ZONE_DMA32 > pfn 500091 - start of the "Unknown E820 type" range > pfn 500224 - start of another pageblock > pfn 500246 - end of "Unknown E820 type" > > So this is indeed not a zone boundary issue, but basically a hole not > aligned to pageblock boundary and really unexpected. > We have CONFIG_HOLES_IN_ZONE (that x86 doesn't set) for architectures > that do this, and even that config only affects pfn_valid_within(). But > here pfn_valid() is true, but the zone/node linkage is unexpected. > >> However the real bug seems that reserved pages have a zero zone_id in >> the page->flags when it should have the real zone id/nid. The patch I >> sent earlier to validate highest would only be needed to deal with >> pfn_valid. >> >> Something must have changed more recently than v5.1 that caused the >> zoneid of reserved pages to be wrong, a possible candidate for the >> real would be this change below: >> >> + __init_single_page(pfn_to_page(pfn), pfn, 0, 0); >> >> Even if it may not be it, at the light of how the reserved page >> zoneid/nid initialized went wrong, the above line like it's too flakey >> to stay. >> >> It'd be preferable if the pfn_valid fails and the >> pfn_to_section_nr(pfn) returns an invalid section for the intermediate >> step. Even better memset 0xff over the whole page struct until the >> second stage comes around. >> >> Whenever pfn_valid is true, it's better that the zoneid/nid is correct >> all times, otherwise if the second stage fails we end up in a bug with >> weird side effects. > > Yeah I guess it would be simpler if zoneid/nid was correct for > pfn_valid() pfns within a zone's range, even if they are reserved due > not not being really usable memory. > > I don't think we want to introduce CONFIG_HOLES_IN_ZONE to x86. If the > chosen solution is to make this to a real hole, the hole should be > extended to MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES aligned boundaries. As we don't punch out pages of the memmap on x86-64, pfn_valid() keeps working as expected. There is a memmap that can be accessed and that was initialized. It's really just a matter of how to handle memory holes in this scenario. a) Try initializing them to the covering node/zone (I gave one example that might be tricky with hotplug) b) Mark such pages (either special node/zone or pagetype) and make pfn walkers ignore these holes. For now, this can only be done via the reserved flag. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb