From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
To: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm,memory_hotplug: Fix shrink_{zone,node}_span
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2019 09:38:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190717073853.GA22253@linux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4gp18-CRADqrqAbR0SnjKBoPaTyL_oaEyyNPJOeLybayg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 07:28:54PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> This makes it more clear that the problem is with the "start_pfn ==
> pfn" check relative to subsections, but it does not clarify why it
> needs to clear pfn_valid() before calling shrink_zone_span().
> Sections were not invalidated prior to shrink_zone_span() in the
> pre-subsection implementation and it seems all we need is to keep the
> same semantic. I.e. skip the range that is currently being removed:
Yes, as I said in my reply to Aneesh, that is the other way I thought
when fixing it.
The reason I went this way is because it seemed more reasonable and
natural to me that pfn_valid() would just return the next active
sub-section.
I just though that we could leverage the fact that we can deactivate
a sub-section before scanning for the next one.
On a second thought, the changes do not outweight the case, being the first
fix enough and less intrusive, so I will send a v2 with that instead.
--
Oscar Salvador
SUSE L3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-17 7:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-15 8:15 [PATCH 0/2] Fixes for sub-section hotplug Oscar Salvador
2019-07-15 8:15 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm,sparse: Fix deactivate_section for early sections Oscar Salvador
2019-07-15 16:02 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2019-07-16 4:33 ` Dan Williams
2019-07-18 12:07 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-15 8:15 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm,memory_hotplug: Fix shrink_{zone,node}_span Oscar Salvador
2019-07-15 16:11 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2019-07-15 21:24 ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-17 2:28 ` Dan Williams
2019-07-17 7:38 ` Oscar Salvador [this message]
2019-07-17 8:01 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-17 8:08 ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-17 5:38 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2019-07-17 7:42 ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-18 12:05 ` Oscar Salvador
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=20190717073853.GA22253@linux \
--to=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.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).