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 E52F0C35679 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 08:58:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBA182192A for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 08:58:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1582534696; bh=yv079CgPi5XebY61kfkJP3H0cEFTnb+7ACLtgwmag1s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=0K0skxDIzaCsKyaS9wPeRHKW/Klys1xXoeUDSgr8uCyClgCa/d4ykN/iuP660Nb5l frEk+oZXRQzCNbNF4CSbl878UF+Cf6th34VG1wKpu+xzO5W7j1EBuZMqoBQZFKxtlK 9ENNghb229tGfAUdVHUvgCeEOOLDv6Ggx1V/Er/E= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727189AbgBXI6Q (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2020 03:58:16 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f68.google.com ([209.85.221.68]:38435 "EHLO mail-wr1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726687AbgBXI6Q (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Feb 2020 03:58:16 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f68.google.com with SMTP id e8so9361434wrm.5 for ; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 00:58:14 -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=H2Cct5hWHL+uQC/bm8Prlx7dsjSsRBh79w87Fgtt9TA=; b=Map5D94VRU1zLb8f19HfjRA4bJ7Wl0h/OCYQcxn12JY/e9+HeK0fTtEmWhZ0QebxUv xHNCg7G25sz5ECQNFbD1RG3YeynJ2Bg0OSwqD4Mv0xjXesAzvoB41mPv+6EXruAOG1m0 7lZ+CBRlYUzs3x+3j1u92mb0HknntVBjbVDaRjFfa/uCtrGFr9xbmSGexpLeCmYtbc0t VsLLKJZRLiyV/bL5iuNufe6u+9vNEJP3041cHfjLFHl1ZBA4IPm2uGbAVT6uHbFywsag a5uuaE9B/0/2FpW6AbCerzNyxdNwA6F1JubNWWT8/x5FIE9R6UozFMKnMDwCU7Zd2i4i I7xw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV+xUmnFs1SSB+qTUdpjkNb/XDphGqwe8NR908EWBAxmpaqER4y 55dCJLMmSMStGUzOCzyGlZA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwI6GLQ96fHtBV39r/Kowb15Ks1F1Wur7CqhfRydMNy5c7m6Bj+2tsJRhgk5dCrnqTmrDx97w== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5263:: with SMTP id l3mr64736786wrc.405.1582534694073; Mon, 24 Feb 2020 00:58:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (prg-ext-pat.suse.com. [213.151.95.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z133sm17730879wmb.7.2020.02.24.00.58.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 24 Feb 2020 00:58:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 09:58:12 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Christopher Lameter Cc: Sachin Sant , Pekka Enberg , David Rientjes , Joonsoo Kim , 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: <20200224085812.GB22443@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> <20200218152441.GH4151@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Sat 22-02-20 03:38:11, Cristopher Lameter wrote: > On Tue, 18 Feb 2020, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > 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. > > That is the case for an unconstrained allocation. kmalloc_node means that > you want memory from that node. And If there is no such node then it is an > error. Hmm, nasty. Is there any reason why kmalloc_node behaves differently from the page allocator? > > A short summary. kmalloc_node blows up when trying to allocate from a > > memory less node. > > Use kmalloc instead? And set a memory allocation policy? The current code (memcg_expand_one_shrinker_map resp. memcg_alloc_shrinker_maps) already use kvmalloc. Kirill's patch wanted to make those data structure on the respective node and kvmalloc_node sounded like the right thing to do. It comes as a surprise that the kernel simply blows up on a memory less node rather than falling back to a close node gracefully. I suspect this already happens when the target node is out of memory, right? How would a memory allocation policy help in this case btw.? -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs