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=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 F0DBFC34026 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 15:24:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3B1020679 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 15:24:45 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1582039485; bh=bJ7tEPmW5tQq6cKJfbCPmjp1OQTNcK5OiewWsFEntrw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=MVqwvkTvTxJgf4WmG0YXaht7peWzvJvXxbYsNQa5gt3upkSsuoA4HaUUaJC0xYf9S xOhOnUpoVA+PccKXHctD23dlLyGKsAwPLumvXCFmH5q7cm/RBEbYPwCgY5EzA0Bbvf fWBA5+Ndz3Zk8yy9DLK1XV63iSHKHJOO1fEEFYKQ= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726761AbgBRPYp (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Feb 2020 10:24:45 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-f66.google.com ([209.85.128.66]:34644 "EHLO mail-wm1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726735AbgBRPYp (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Feb 2020 10:24:45 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-f66.google.com with SMTP id s144so2436617wme.1 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:24:44 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=WF5nuerORwTKU2LdOD06412iR6E4PQ55wctVgD1QbZA=; b=ZLHiN8waW2aJQ8jdrVeb0RxEvsp7CkpzoCW/tm75bpVJR2KrQZIt5tOjb/8xCbhsG7 wixC2it7cFmucQti/Pn44d42hBG7uLrRoHvJYHlzJjsWV8zLr6LTWbOElJKsM4fbVuyr Ra4QkfejP8zRqyf7VOYvXFjCcq5y6ueM/490OQE9rRqIWFnnL8f8a+I4S1GO1hXurtpy 8i4Sh61pQp4KpCtM70ySEqpg+oVZJyKaXTXzg2TRA9tq776moiFIy6oHTqi6OIakiXvt iemylWHPPqp1e6zvj+cZ+5mSBy41EshpLMSmQPijZrDch1KAQQuXag+f9ImbtNSGw3Bv qJYg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV9fNn2cN+qHhadvITULuuzRTkbvN6ZtVs+IVziElKzy9A7DqCm pW6vXI6l4jV1nwcDD9DdzV0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzpSJj6qrSybFT0mjUD/YGni0vccUWIowyCmX38SpilgquuDnPuAUh5eHHoc62hLywZ39flFw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3d1:: with SMTP id z17mr3868397wmd.90.1582039483432; Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:24:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (prg-ext-pat.suse.com. [213.151.95.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b67sm3847476wmc.38.2020.02.18.07.24.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 18 Feb 2020 07:24:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2020 16:24:41 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Sachin Sant , Cristopher Lameter , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim Cc: Kirill Tkhai , Linux-Next Mailing List , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [5.6.0-rc2-next-20200218/powerpc] Boot failure on POWER9 Message-ID: <20200218152441.GH4151@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <3381CD91-AB3D-4773-BA04-E7A072A63968@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <0ba2a3c6-6593-2cee-1cef-983cd75f920f@virtuozzo.com> <20200218115525.GD4151@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20200218142620.GF4151@dhcp22.suse.cz> <35EE65CF-40E3-4870-AEBC-D326977176DA@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <35EE65CF-40E3-4870-AEBC-D326977176DA@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Tue 18-02-20 20:41:12, Sachin Sant wrote: > > >> Yes, I can recreate the same problem with the patch applied on top of > >> 5.6.0-rc2. > > > > And just to make sure. This was with http://lkml.kernel.org/r/fff0e636-4c36-ed10-281c-8cdb0687c839@virtuozzo.com > > right? > > > Yes, the same patch. > > > If yes, is it possible that the specific node is somehow crippled (e.g. > > some nodes don't have any memory and thus the allocator blows up)? In > > other words what is the numa topology? (numactl -H) > > > > Here is the o/p of numactl > > # numactl -H > available: 2 nodes (0-1) > node 0 cpus: > node 0 size: 0 MB > node 0 free: 0 MB OK, so what I expected. The node0 is memory less or simply not present at all. Fun! Anyway, I do not think it is expected that kmalloc_node just blows up on those nodes. The page allocator simply falls back to the closest node. Something for kmalloc maintainers I believe. A short summary. kmalloc_node blows up when trying to allocate from a memory less node. > node 1 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 > node 1 size: 35247 MB > node 1 free: 30907 MB > node distances: > node 0 1 > 0: 10 40 > 1: 40 10 > # > > Thanks > -Sachin -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs