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=-7.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable 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 70474C282D7 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 08:47:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B450C20820 for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 08:47:20 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B450C20820 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ellerman.id.au Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43tLtZ2Zq0zDqHp for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 19:47:18 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from ozlabs.org (bilbo.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 43tLrH070FzDqGQ for ; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 19:45:19 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ellerman.id.au Received: from authenticated.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 43tLrG3rCyz9s4Z; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 19:45:18 +1100 (AEDT) From: Michael Ellerman To: Mike Rapoport Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/21] memblock: refactor internal allocation functions In-Reply-To: <20190203113915.GC8620@rapoport-lnx> References: <1548057848-15136-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com> <1548057848-15136-11-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com> <87ftt5nrcn.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> <20190203113915.GC8620@rapoport-lnx> Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 19:45:17 +1100 Message-ID: <878sywndr6.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Mike Rapoport writes: > On Sun, Feb 03, 2019 at 08:39:20PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: >> Mike Rapoport writes: >> > Currently, memblock has several internal functions with overlapping >> > functionality. They all call memblock_find_in_range_node() to find free >> > memory and then reserve the allocated range and mark it with kmemleak. >> > However, there is difference in the allocation constraints and in fallback >> > strategies. ... >> >> This is causing problems on some of my machines. ... >> >> On some of my other systems it does that, and then panics because it >> can't allocate anything at all: >> >> [ 0.000000] numa: NODE_DATA [mem 0x7ffcaee80-0x7ffcb3fff] >> [ 0.000000] numa: NODE_DATA [mem 0x7ffc99d00-0x7ffc9ee7f] >> [ 0.000000] numa: NODE_DATA(1) on node 0 >> [ 0.000000] Kernel panic - not syncing: Cannot allocate 20864 bytes for node 16 data >> [ 0.000000] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not tainted 5.0.0-rc4-gccN-next-20190201-gdc4c899 #1 >> [ 0.000000] Call Trace: >> [ 0.000000] [c0000000011cfca0] [c000000000c11044] dump_stack+0xe8/0x164 (unreliable) >> [ 0.000000] [c0000000011cfcf0] [c0000000000fdd6c] panic+0x17c/0x3e0 >> [ 0.000000] [c0000000011cfd90] [c000000000f61bc8] initmem_init+0x128/0x260 >> [ 0.000000] [c0000000011cfe60] [c000000000f57940] setup_arch+0x398/0x418 >> [ 0.000000] [c0000000011cfee0] [c000000000f50a94] start_kernel+0xa0/0x684 >> [ 0.000000] [c0000000011cff90] [c00000000000af70] start_here_common+0x1c/0x52c >> [ 0.000000] Rebooting in 180 seconds.. >> >> >> So there's something going wrong there, I haven't had time to dig into >> it though (Sunday night here). > > Yeah, I've misplaced 'nid' and 'MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE' in > memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid() :( > > Can you please check if the below patch fixes the issue on your systems? Yes it does, thanks. Tested-by: Michael Ellerman cheers > From 5875b7440e985ce551e6da3cb28aa8e9af697e10 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Mike Rapoport > Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 13:35:42 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] memblock: fix parameter order in > memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid() > > The refactoring of internal memblock allocation functions used wrong order > of parameters in memblock_alloc_range_nid() call from > memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid(). > Fix it. > > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport > --- > mm/memblock.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c > index e047933..0151a5b 100644 > --- a/mm/memblock.c > +++ b/mm/memblock.c > @@ -1402,8 +1402,8 @@ phys_addr_t __init memblock_phys_alloc_range(phys_addr_t size, > > phys_addr_t __init memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid(phys_addr_t size, phys_addr_t align, int nid) > { > - return memblock_alloc_range_nid(size, align, 0, nid, > - MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE); > + return memblock_alloc_range_nid(size, align, 0, > + MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE, nid); > } > > /** > -- > 2.7.4 > > > -- > Sincerely yours, > Mike.