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=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 F21B5C433B4 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 05:59:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8116E61428 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 05:59:53 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 8116E61428 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 817796B0036; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 01:59:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 7A03D6B006E; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 01:59:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 5F2CD6B0070; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 01:59:52 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0176.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.176]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FA3A6B0036 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 01:59:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin15.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF91C8249980 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 05:59:51 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78080724582.15.9563966 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf21.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 239D8E00011D for ; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 05:59:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6570261418; Wed, 28 Apr 2021 05:59:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1619589590; bh=FgrS4XUHz0O6Fa4p86bx504/a38cD5C/C9ebOq8CMgE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=kxQO8XXtHgJ92g69cQtUE/ztppXG10NjcTg3AAVJeNGHFfHBIwaxtHqYm4HKtsOM8 4pSH5hGTD/9dj+8+vp8XTh4poyGEKzDLbHfyz/p+fkTYk5UbI7PvZTP0EBlYgRcDBt /UDubaGboihUuxJZ1iP9B6sJRYsCqp62pwxj1WOiQZr6AQIXrzuCoeW+b3lhv2xDNN SwA6SCvteDVDkn4bMSCBOJLV9ILEVFDAzMKmVvjSB+LjAS1Zh6xwmAuOxr+nuYUIDO hivwDhPoKspBevnIwMGctMyL5ixCSC4HKCbNvK1zsCWv9dkrAhxTjUQvkAJ6nuZtK0 Yj87vphXjtkmg== Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2021 08:59:41 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Kefeng Wang Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Andrew Morton , Anshuman Khandual , Ard Biesheuvel , Catalin Marinas , David Hildenbrand , Marc Zyngier , Mark Rutland , Mike Rapoport , Will Deacon , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: arm32: panic in move_freepages (Was [PATCH v2 0/4] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid()) Message-ID: 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> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <259d14df-a713-72e7-4ccb-c06a8ee31e13@huawei.com> X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 239D8E00011D X-Stat-Signature: ufrneq75yotm5ixqwrp8weui3kkc1dhk X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 Received-SPF: none (kernel.org>: No applicable sender policy available) receiver=imf21; identity=mailfrom; envelope-from=""; helo=mail.kernel.org; client-ip=198.145.29.99 X-HE-DKIM-Result: pass/pass X-HE-Tag: 1619589588-828988 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 Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 07:08:59PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: >=20 > 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: > > > > >=20 > > > > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2021 at 04:11:16PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wro= te: > > > > >=20 > > > > > I tested this patchset(plus arm32 change, like arm64 = does) > > > > > based on lts 5.10=EF=BC=8Cadd some debug log, the use= ful info shows > > > > > below, if we enable HOLES_IN_ZONE, no panic, any idea= , > > > > > thanks. > > > > >=20 > > > > > 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? > > > > >=20 > > > > > 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? --=20 Sincerely yours, Mike.