From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"mike.travis@hpe.com" <mike.travis@hpe.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Andrew Banman <andrew.banman@hpe.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>, Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>,
Arun KS <arunks@codeaurora.org>,
Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 07/11] mm/memory_hotplug: Create memory block devices after arch_add_memory()
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2019 21:42:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190604214234.ltwtkcdoju2gxisx@master> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190527111152.16324-8-david@redhat.com>
On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 01:11:48PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>Only memory to be added to the buddy and to be onlined/offlined by
>user space using /sys/devices/system/memory/... needs (and should have!)
>memory block devices.
>
>Factor out creation of memory block devices. Create all devices after
>arch_add_memory() succeeded. We can later drop the want_memblock parameter,
>because it is now effectively stale.
>
>Only after memory block devices have been added, memory can be onlined
>by user space. This implies, that memory is not visible to user space at
>all before arch_add_memory() succeeded.
>
>While at it
>- use WARN_ON_ONCE instead of BUG_ON in moved unregister_memory()
>- introduce find_memory_block_by_id() to search via block id
>- Use find_memory_block_by_id() in init_memory_block() to catch
> duplicates
Generally looks good to me besides two tiny comments.
>
>Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
>Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
>Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>Cc: "mike.travis@hpe.com" <mike.travis@hpe.com>
>Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
>Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
>Cc: Andrew Banman <andrew.banman@hpe.com>
>Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
>Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
>Cc: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>
>Cc: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
>Cc: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
>Cc: Arun KS <arunks@codeaurora.org>
>Cc: Mathieu Malaterre <malat@debian.org>
>Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>---
> drivers/base/memory.c | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> include/linux/memory.h | 2 +-
> mm/memory_hotplug.c | 15 ++++----
> 3 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/base/memory.c b/drivers/base/memory.c
>index ac17c95a5f28..5a0370f0c506 100644
>--- a/drivers/base/memory.c
>+++ b/drivers/base/memory.c
>@@ -39,6 +39,11 @@ static inline int base_memory_block_id(int section_nr)
> return section_nr / sections_per_block;
> }
>
>+static inline int pfn_to_block_id(unsigned long pfn)
>+{
>+ return base_memory_block_id(pfn_to_section_nr(pfn));
>+}
>+
> static int memory_subsys_online(struct device *dev);
> static int memory_subsys_offline(struct device *dev);
>
>@@ -582,10 +587,9 @@ int __weak arch_get_memory_phys_device(unsigned long start_pfn)
> * A reference for the returned object is held and the reference for the
> * hinted object is released.
> */
>-struct memory_block *find_memory_block_hinted(struct mem_section *section,
>- struct memory_block *hint)
>+static struct memory_block *find_memory_block_by_id(int block_id,
>+ struct memory_block *hint)
> {
>- int block_id = base_memory_block_id(__section_nr(section));
> struct device *hintdev = hint ? &hint->dev : NULL;
> struct device *dev;
>
>@@ -597,6 +601,14 @@ struct memory_block *find_memory_block_hinted(struct mem_section *section,
> return to_memory_block(dev);
> }
>
>+struct memory_block *find_memory_block_hinted(struct mem_section *section,
>+ struct memory_block *hint)
>+{
>+ int block_id = base_memory_block_id(__section_nr(section));
>+
>+ return find_memory_block_by_id(block_id, hint);
>+}
>+
> /*
> * For now, we have a linear search to go find the appropriate
> * memory_block corresponding to a particular phys_index. If
>@@ -658,6 +670,11 @@ static int init_memory_block(struct memory_block **memory, int block_id,
> unsigned long start_pfn;
> int ret = 0;
>
>+ mem = find_memory_block_by_id(block_id, NULL);
>+ if (mem) {
>+ put_device(&mem->dev);
>+ return -EEXIST;
>+ }
find_memory_block_by_id() is not that close to the main idea in this patch.
Would it be better to split this part?
> mem = kzalloc(sizeof(*mem), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!mem)
> return -ENOMEM;
>@@ -699,44 +716,53 @@ static int add_memory_block(int base_section_nr)
> return 0;
> }
>
>+static void unregister_memory(struct memory_block *memory)
>+{
>+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(memory->dev.bus != &memory_subsys))
>+ return;
>+
>+ /* drop the ref. we got via find_memory_block() */
>+ put_device(&memory->dev);
>+ device_unregister(&memory->dev);
>+}
>+
> /*
>- * need an interface for the VM to add new memory regions,
>- * but without onlining it.
>+ * Create memory block devices for the given memory area. Start and size
>+ * have to be aligned to memory block granularity. Memory block devices
>+ * will be initialized as offline.
> */
>-int hotplug_memory_register(int nid, struct mem_section *section)
>+int create_memory_block_devices(unsigned long start, unsigned long size)
> {
>- int block_id = base_memory_block_id(__section_nr(section));
>- int ret = 0;
>+ const int start_block_id = pfn_to_block_id(PFN_DOWN(start));
>+ int end_block_id = pfn_to_block_id(PFN_DOWN(start + size));
> struct memory_block *mem;
>+ unsigned long block_id;
>+ int ret = 0;
>
>- mutex_lock(&mem_sysfs_mutex);
>+ if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!IS_ALIGNED(start, memory_block_size_bytes()) ||
>+ !IS_ALIGNED(size, memory_block_size_bytes())))
>+ return -EINVAL;
>
>- mem = find_memory_block(section);
>- if (mem) {
>- mem->section_count++;
>- put_device(&mem->dev);
>- } else {
>+ mutex_lock(&mem_sysfs_mutex);
>+ for (block_id = start_block_id; block_id != end_block_id; block_id++) {
> ret = init_memory_block(&mem, block_id, MEM_OFFLINE);
> if (ret)
>- goto out;
>- mem->section_count++;
>+ break;
>+ mem->section_count = sections_per_block;
>+ }
>+ if (ret) {
>+ end_block_id = block_id;
>+ for (block_id = start_block_id; block_id != end_block_id;
>+ block_id++) {
>+ mem = find_memory_block_by_id(block_id, NULL);
>+ mem->section_count = 0;
>+ unregister_memory(mem);
>+ }
> }
Would it be better to do this in reverse order?
And unregister_memory() would free mem, so it is still necessary to set
section_count to 0?
>-
>-out:
> mutex_unlock(&mem_sysfs_mutex);
> return ret;
> }
>
>-static void
>-unregister_memory(struct memory_block *memory)
>-{
>- BUG_ON(memory->dev.bus != &memory_subsys);
>-
>- /* drop the ref. we got via find_memory_block() */
>- put_device(&memory->dev);
>- device_unregister(&memory->dev);
>-}
>-
> void unregister_memory_section(struct mem_section *section)
> {
> struct memory_block *mem;
>diff --git a/include/linux/memory.h b/include/linux/memory.h
>index 474c7c60c8f2..db3e8567f900 100644
>--- a/include/linux/memory.h
>+++ b/include/linux/memory.h
>@@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ extern int register_memory_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb);
> extern void unregister_memory_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb);
> extern int register_memory_isolate_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb);
> extern void unregister_memory_isolate_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb);
>-int hotplug_memory_register(int nid, struct mem_section *section);
>+int create_memory_block_devices(unsigned long start, unsigned long size);
> extern void unregister_memory_section(struct mem_section *);
> extern int memory_dev_init(void);
> extern int memory_notify(unsigned long val, void *v);
>diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>index 4b9d2974f86c..b1fde90bbf19 100644
>--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>@@ -259,13 +259,7 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid, unsigned long phys_start_pfn,
> return -EEXIST;
>
> ret = sparse_add_one_section(nid, phys_start_pfn, altmap);
>- if (ret < 0)
>- return ret;
>-
>- if (!want_memblock)
>- return 0;
>-
>- return hotplug_memory_register(nid, __pfn_to_section(phys_start_pfn));
>+ return ret < 0 ? ret : 0;
> }
>
> /*
>@@ -1107,6 +1101,13 @@ int __ref add_memory_resource(int nid, struct resource *res)
> if (ret < 0)
> goto error;
>
>+ /* create memory block devices after memory was added */
>+ ret = create_memory_block_devices(start, size);
>+ if (ret) {
>+ arch_remove_memory(nid, start, size, NULL);
>+ goto error;
>+ }
>+
> if (new_node) {
> /* If sysfs file of new node can't be created, cpu on the node
> * can't be hot-added. There is no rollback way now.
>--
>2.20.1
--
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-04 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20190527111152.16324-1-david@redhat.com>
2019-05-27 11:11 ` [PATCH v3 01/11] mm/memory_hotplug: Simplify and fix check_hotplug_memory_range() David Hildenbrand
2019-05-30 17:53 ` Pavel Tatashin
2019-06-10 16:46 ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-01 7:42 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27 11:11 ` [PATCH v3 02/11] s390x/mm: Fail when an altmap is used for arch_add_memory() David Hildenbrand
2019-06-10 17:07 ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-01 7:43 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-01 12:46 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-15 10:51 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-19 6:45 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27 11:11 ` [PATCH v3 03/11] s390x/mm: Implement arch_remove_memory() David Hildenbrand
2019-07-01 7:45 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-01 12:47 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-15 10:45 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-27 11:11 ` [PATCH v3 04/11] arm64/mm: Add temporary arch_remove_memory() implementation David Hildenbrand
2019-06-03 21:41 ` Wei Yang
2019-06-04 6:56 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-04 17:36 ` Robin Murphy
2019-06-04 17:51 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-01 12:48 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27 11:11 ` [PATCH v3 05/11] drivers/base/memory: Pass a block_id to init_memory_block() David Hildenbrand
2019-06-03 21:49 ` Wei Yang
2019-06-04 6:56 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-01 7:56 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27 11:11 ` [PATCH v3 07/11] mm/memory_hotplug: Create memory block devices after arch_add_memory() David Hildenbrand
2019-05-30 21:07 ` Pavel Tatashin
2019-06-04 21:42 ` Wei Yang [this message]
2019-06-05 8:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-05 10:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-06-05 21:22 ` Wei Yang
2019-06-05 21:50 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-01 8:14 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27 11:11 ` [PATCH v3 08/11] mm/memory_hotplug: Drop MHP_MEMBLOCK_API David Hildenbrand
2019-06-04 21:47 ` Wei Yang
2019-07-01 8:15 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27 11:11 ` [PATCH v3 09/11] mm/memory_hotplug: Remove memory block devices before arch_remove_memory() David Hildenbrand
2019-06-04 22:07 ` Wei Yang
2019-06-05 9:00 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-01 8:41 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-15 10:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-05-27 11:11 ` [PATCH v3 10/11] mm/memory_hotplug: Make unregister_memory_block_under_nodes() never fail David Hildenbrand
2019-06-05 21:21 ` Wei Yang
2019-06-10 16:56 ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-01 8:51 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-01 9:36 ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-01 10:27 ` Michal Hocko
2019-07-15 11:10 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-16 8:46 ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-16 11:08 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-16 11:09 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-07-19 6:05 ` Michal Hocko
2019-05-27 11:11 ` [PATCH v3 11/11] mm/memory_hotplug: Remove "zone" parameter from sparse_remove_one_section David Hildenbrand
2019-06-05 21:21 ` Wei Yang
2019-06-10 16:58 ` Oscar Salvador
2019-07-01 8:52 ` Michal Hocko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190604214234.ltwtkcdoju2gxisx@master \
--to=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrew.banman@hpe.com \
--cc=arunks@codeaurora.org \
--cc=cai@lca.pw \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=malat@debian.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mike.travis@hpe.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).