From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
logang@deltatee.com, osalvador@suse.de, hannes@cmpxchg.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, richard.weiyang@gmail.com,
rientjes@google.com, zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu
Subject: Re: [RFC] mm/hotplug: Make get_nid_for_pfn() work with HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 17:33:19 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <65a4b160-a654-8bd3-8022-491094cf6b8f@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190322120219.GI32418@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 03/22/2019 05:32 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 22-03-19 11:49:30, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>
>> On 03/21/2019 02:06 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>> On Thu 21-03-19 13:38:20, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>>> Memory hot remove uses get_nid_for_pfn() while tearing down linked sysfs
>>>> entries between memory block and node. It first checks pfn validity with
>>>> pfn_valid_within() before fetching nid. With CONFIG_HOLES_IN_ZONE config
>>>> (arm64 has this enabled) pfn_valid_within() calls pfn_valid().
>>>>
>>>> pfn_valid() is an arch implementation on arm64 (CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID)
>>>> which scans all mapped memblock regions with memblock_is_map_memory(). This
>>>> creates a problem in memory hot remove path which has already removed given
>>>> memory range from memory block with memblock_[remove|free] before arriving
>>>> at unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes().
>>> Could you be more specific on what is the actual problem please? It
>>> would be also helpful to mention when is the memblock[remove|free]
>>> called actually.
>> The problem is in unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes() as it skips calling into both
>> instances of sysfs_remove_link() which removes node-memory block sysfs symlinks.
>> The node enumeration of the memory block still remains in sysfs even if the memory
>> block itself has been removed.
>>
>> This happens because get_nid_for_pfn() returns -1 for a given pfn even if it has
>> a valid associated struct page to fetch the node ID from.
>>
>> On arm64 (with CONFIG_HOLES_IN_ZONE)
>>
>> get_nid_for_pfn() -> pfn_valid_within() -> pfn_valid -> memblock_is_map_memory()
>>
>> At this point memblock for the range has been removed.
>>
>> __remove_memory()
>> memblock_free()
>> memblock_remove() --------> memblock has already been removed
>> arch_remove_memory()
>> __remove_pages()
>> __remove_section()
>> unregister_memory_section()
>> remove_memory_section()
>> unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes()
>>
>> There is a dependency on memblock (after it has been removed) through pfn_valid().
> Can we reorganize or rework the code that the memblock is removed later?
> I guess this is what Oscar was suggesting.
I could get it working with the following re-order of memblock_[free|remove] and
arch_remove_memory(). I did not observe any other adverse side affect because of
this change. Does it look okay ?
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -1863,11 +1863,11 @@ void __ref __remove_memory(int nid, u64 start, u64 size)
/* remove memmap entry */
firmware_map_remove(start, start + size, "System RAM");
+ arch_remove_memory(nid, start, size, NULL);
+
memblock_free(start, size);
memblock_remove(start, size);
- arch_remove_memory(nid, start, size, NULL);
-
try_offline_node(nid);
mem_hotplug_done();
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-26 12:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-21 8:08 [RFC] mm/hotplug: Make get_nid_for_pfn() work with HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID Anshuman Khandual
2019-03-21 8:36 ` Michal Hocko
2019-03-22 6:19 ` Anshuman Khandual
2019-03-22 12:02 ` Michal Hocko
2019-03-26 12:03 ` Anshuman Khandual [this message]
2019-03-26 12:25 ` Michal Hocko
2019-03-21 10:37 ` Oscar Salvador
2019-03-22 6:45 ` Anshuman Khandual
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=65a4b160-a654-8bd3-8022-491094cf6b8f@arm.com \
--to=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=logang@deltatee.com \
--cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=zi.yan@cs.rutgers.edu \
/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).