From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@oracle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
"Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] mm/page_alloc: fix and rework pfn handling in memmap_init_zone()
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2020 22:44:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1583F4CF-6CD8-4AB6-A2F6-60E6AEE5D5B2@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAKgT0UdFphMbS04NMRYU=VUmbnVi_purz4UA0cqA3dd7YW-pJA@mail.gmail.com>
> Am 03.02.2020 um 22:35 schrieb Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>:
>
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 6:40 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Let's update the pfn manually whenever we continue the loop. This makes
>> the code easier to read but also less error prone (and we can directly
>> fix one issue).
>>
>> When overlap_memmap_init() returns true, pfn is updated to
>> "memblock_region_memory_end_pfn(r)". So it already points at the *next*
>> pfn to process. Incrementing the pfn another time is wrong, we might
>> leave one uninitialized. I spotted this by inspecting the code, so I have
>> no idea if this is relevant in practise (with kernelcore=mirror).
>>
>> Fixes: a9a9e77fbf27 ("mm: move mirrored memory specific code outside of memmap_init_zone")
>> Cc: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@oracle.com>
>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
>> Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
>> Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
>> Cc: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name>
>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> mm/page_alloc.c | 9 ++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> index a41bd7341de1..a92791512077 100644
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -5905,18 +5905,20 @@ void __meminit memmap_init_zone(unsigned long size, int nid, unsigned long zone,
>> }
>> #endif
>>
>> - for (pfn = start_pfn; pfn < end_pfn; pfn++) {
>> + for (pfn = start_pfn; pfn < end_pfn; ) {
>> /*
>> * There can be holes in boot-time mem_map[]s handed to this
>> * function. They do not exist on hotplugged memory.
>> */
>> if (context == MEMMAP_EARLY) {
>> if (!early_pfn_valid(pfn)) {
>> - pfn = next_pfn(pfn) - 1;
>> + pfn = next_pfn(pfn);
>> continue;
>> }
>> - if (!early_pfn_in_nid(pfn, nid))
>> + if (!early_pfn_in_nid(pfn, nid)) {
>> + pfn++;
>> continue;
>> + }
>> if (overlap_memmap_init(zone, &pfn))
>> continue;
>> if (defer_init(nid, pfn, end_pfn))
>
> I'm pretty sure this is a bit broken. The overlap_memmap_init is going
> to return memblock_region_memory_end_pfn instead of the start of the
> next region. I think that is going to stick you in a mirrored region
> without advancing in that case. You would also need to have that case
> do a pfn++ before the continue;
Thanks for having a look.
Did you read the description regarding this change?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-03 21:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-13 14:40 [PATCH v1 0/2] mm/page_alloc: memmap_init_zone() cleanups David Hildenbrand
2020-01-13 14:40 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] mm/page_alloc: fix and rework pfn handling in memmap_init_zone() David Hildenbrand
2020-02-03 21:35 ` Alexander Duyck
2020-02-03 21:44 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2020-02-03 23:17 ` Alexander Duyck
2020-02-04 8:40 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-13 14:40 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] mm: factor out next_present_section_nr() David Hildenbrand
2020-01-13 22:41 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2020-01-13 22:57 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-13 23:02 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-14 10:41 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2020-01-14 10:49 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-14 15:52 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2020-01-14 16:50 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-14 16:52 ` David Hildenbrand
2020-01-31 4:30 ` [PATCH v1 0/2] mm/page_alloc: memmap_init_zone() cleanups Andrew Morton
2020-02-03 14:49 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1583F4CF-6CD8-4AB6-A2F6-60E6AEE5D5B2@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).