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=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 761DDC06511 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 07:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50DE821721 for ; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 07:48:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726344AbfGBHsX (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jul 2019 03:48:23 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:60946 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725851AbfGBHsX (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Jul 2019 03:48:23 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63296AFFB; Tue, 2 Jul 2019 07:48:21 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 09:48:18 +0200 From: Oscar Salvador To: Rashmica Gupta Cc: David Hildenbrand , akpm@linux-foundation.org, mhocko@suse.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, pasha.tatashin@soleen.com, Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com, anshuman.khandual@arm.com, vbabka@suse.cz, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Allocate memmap from hotadded memory Message-ID: <20190702074806.GA26836@linux> References: <20190625075227.15193-1-osalvador@suse.de> <2ebfbd36-11bd-9576-e373-2964c458185b@redhat.com> <20190626080249.GA30863@linux> <2750c11a-524d-b248-060c-49e6b3eb8975@redhat.com> <20190626081516.GC30863@linux> <887b902e-063d-a857-d472-f6f69d954378@redhat.com> <9143f64391d11aa0f1988e78be9de7ff56e4b30b.camel@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9143f64391d11aa0f1988e78be9de7ff56e4b30b.camel@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 02, 2019 at 04:42:34PM +1000, Rashmica Gupta wrote: > Hi David, > > Sorry for the late reply. > > On Wed, 2019-06-26 at 10:28 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > On 26.06.19 10:15, Oscar Salvador wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 10:11:06AM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote: > > > > Back then, I already mentioned that we might have some users that > > > > remove_memory() they never added in a granularity it wasn't > > > > added. My > > > > concerns back then were never fully sorted out. > > > > > > > > arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/memtrace.c > > > > > > > > - Will remove memory in memory block size chunks it never added > > > > - What if that memory resides on a DIMM added via > > > > MHP_MEMMAP_DEVICE? > > > > > > > > Will it at least bail out? Or simply break? > > > > > > > > IOW: I am not yet 100% convinced that MHP_MEMMAP_DEVICE is save > > > > to be > > > > introduced. > > > > > > Uhm, I will take a closer look and see if I can clear your > > > concerns. > > > TBH, I did not try to use arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/memtrace.c > > > yet. > > > > > > I will get back to you once I tried it out. > > > > > > > BTW, I consider the code in arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/memtrace.c > > very ugly and dangerous. > > Yes it would be nice to clean this up. > > > We should never allow to manually > > offline/online pages / hack into memory block states. > > > > What I would want to see here is rather: > > > > 1. User space offlines the blocks to be used > > 2. memtrace installs a hotplug notifier and hinders the blocks it > > wants > > to use from getting onlined. > > 3. memory is not added/removed/onlined/offlined in memtrace code. > > > > I remember looking into doing it a similar way. I can't recall the > details but my issue was probably 'how does userspace indicate to > the kernel that this memory being offlined should be removed'? > > I don't know the mm code nor how the notifiers work very well so I > can't quite see how the above would work. I'm assuming memtrace would > register a hotplug notifier and when memory is offlined from userspace, > the callback func in memtrace would be called if the priority was high > enough? But how do we know that the memory being offlined is intended > for usto touch? Is there a way to offline memory from userspace not > using sysfs or have I missed something in the sysfs interface? > > On a second read, perhaps you are assuming that memtrace is used after > adding new memory at runtime? If so, that is not the case. If not, then > would you be able to clarify what I'm not seeing? Hi Rashmica, let us go the easy way here. Could you please explain: 1) How memtrace works 2) Why it was designed, what is the goal of the interface? 3) When it is supposed to be used? I have seen a couple of reports in the past from people running memtrace and failing to do so sometimes, and back then I could not grasp why people was using it, or under which circumstances was nice to have. So it would be nice to have a detailed explanation from the person who wrote it. Thanks -- Oscar Salvador SUSE L3