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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, 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 C20ACC43460 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 00:48:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41D5E6141E for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 00:48:39 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 41D5E6141E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id A00876B006C; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 20:48:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 9B0CE6B006E; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 20:48:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 8516F6B0070; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 20:48:38 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0017.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.17]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 673CD6B006C for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 20:48:38 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin09.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F1133489 for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 00:48:38 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78083569116.09.9392DCB Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com (szxga04-in.huawei.com [45.249.212.190]) by imf12.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04E54EF for ; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 00:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from DGGEMS401-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.58]) by szxga04-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4FVxcN65dqzlVyx; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 08:45:24 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.174.177.244] (10.174.177.244) by DGGEMS401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.498.0; Thu, 29 Apr 2021 08:48:27 +0800 Subject: Re: arm32: panic in move_freepages (Was [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid()) To: Mike Rapoport CC: , Andrew Morton , Anshuman Khandual , Ard Biesheuvel , Catalin Marinas , David Hildenbrand , Marc Zyngier , "Mark Rutland" , Mike Rapoport , "Will Deacon" , , , References: <9aa68d26-d736-3b75-4828-f148964eb7f0@huawei.com> <33fa74c2-f32d-f224-eb30-acdb717179ff@huawei.com> <2a1592ad-bc9d-4664-fd19-f7448a37edc0@huawei.com> <52f7d03b-7219-46bc-c62d-b976bc31ebd5@huawei.com> <2d879629-3059-fd42-428f-4b7c2a73d698@huawei.com> <259d14df-a713-72e7-4ccb-c06a8ee31e13@huawei.com> From: Kefeng Wang Message-ID: <6ad2956c-70ae-c423-ed7d-88e94c88060f@huawei.com> Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 08:48:26 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.174.177.244] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 04E54EF X-Stat-Signature: 31ursxe18trhst6h948efjgh88udfaep Received-SPF: none (huawei.com>: No applicable sender policy available) receiver=imf12; identity=mailfrom; envelope-from=""; helo=szxga04-in.huawei.com; client-ip=45.249.212.190 X-HE-DKIM-Result: none/none X-HE-Tag: 1619657305-265840 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On 2021/4/28 13:59, Mike Rapoport wrote: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 07:08:59PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: >> On 2021/4/27 14:23, Mike Rapoport wrote: >>> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 11:26:38PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: >>>> On 2021/4/26 13:20, Mike Rapoport wrote: >>>>> On Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 03:51:56PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: >>>>>> On 2021/4/25 15:19, Mike Rapoport wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 04:11:16PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote= : >>>>>> >>>>>> I tested this patchset(plus arm32 change, like arm64 do= es) >>>>>> based on lts 5.10=EF=BC=8Cadd some debug log, the usefu= l info shows >>>>>> below, if we enable HOLES_IN_ZONE, no panic, any idea, >>>>>> thanks. >>>>>> >>>>>> Are there any changes on top of 5.10 except for pfn_valid()= patch? >>>>>> Do you see this panic on 5.10 without the changes? >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes, there are some BSP support for arm board based on 5.10, >>> Is it possible to test 5.12? > Do you use SPARSMEM? If yes, what is your section size? > What is the value if CONFIG_FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER in your configuration? Yes, CONFIG_SPARSEMEM=3Dy CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_STATIC=3Dy CONFIG_FORCE_MAX_ZONEORDER =3D 11 CONFIG_PAGE_OFFSET=3D0xC0000000 CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID=3Dy CONFIG_HIGHMEM=3Dy #define SECTION_SIZE_BITS 26 #define MAX_PHYSADDR_BITS 32 #define MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS 32 >