Re: [PATCH 0/6] mm: make movable onlining suck less

From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To: Reza Arbab <arbab@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
	Yasuaki Ishimatsu <yasu.isimatu@gmail.com>,
	Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	qiuxishi@huawei.com, Kani Toshimitsu <toshi.kani@hpe.com>,
	slaoub@gmail.com, Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	Zhang Zhen <zhenzhang.zhang@huawei.com>,
	David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
	Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@oracle.com>,
	Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>,
	Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@mellanox.com>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@gmail.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] mm: make movable onlining suck less
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 21:39:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170405193933.GW6035@dhcp22.suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170405181502.GU6035@dhcp22.suse.cz>

On Wed 05-04-17 20:15:02, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 05-04-17 12:32:49, Reza Arbab wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 05:42:59PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > >But one thing that is really bugging me is how could you see low pfns in
> > >the previous oops. Please drop the last patch and sprinkle printks down
> > >the remove_memory path to see where this all go south. I believe that
> > >there is something in the initialization code lurking in my code. Please
> > >also scratch the pfn_valid check in online_pages diff. It will not help
> > >here.
> > 
> > Got it.
> > 
> > shrink_pgdat_span: start_pfn=0x10000, end_pfn=0x10100, pgdat_start_pfn=0x0, pgdat_end_pfn=0x20000
> > 
> > The problem is that pgdat_start_pfn here should be 0x10000. As you
> > suspected, it never got set. This fixes things for me.
> > 
> > diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> > index 623507f..37c1b63 100644
> > --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> > +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> > @@ -884,7 +884,7 @@ static void __meminit resize_pgdat_range(struct pglist_data *pgdat, unsigned lon
> > {
> > 	unsigned long old_end_pfn = pgdat_end_pfn(pgdat);
> > 
> > -	if (start_pfn < pgdat->node_start_pfn)
> > +	if (!pgdat->node_spanned_pages || start_pfn < pgdat->node_start_pfn)
> > 		pgdat->node_start_pfn = start_pfn;
> 
> Dang! You are absolutely right. This explains the issue during the
> remove_memory. I still fail to see how this makes any difference for the
> sysfs file registration though. If anything the pgdat will be larger and
> so try_offline_node would check also unrelated node0 but the code will
> handle that and eventually offline the node1 anyway. /me still confused.

OK, so I've managed to convince my kvm setup to create a node without
any memory initially but I cannot seem to be able to reach
node_set_offline in try_offline_node because check_and_unmap_cpu_on_node
fails for me even when I offline cpus bound to the node because we are
using for_each_present_cpu in check_cpu_on_node so I would have to start
with a cpuless node or find a way how to hotremove those cpus.
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs