* [PATCH 1/3] mm/page_isolation: return last tested pfn rather than failure indicator
@ 2015-11-13 2:23 Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated Joonsoo Kim
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Joonsoo Kim @ 2015-11-13 2:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Joonsoo Kim
This is preparation step to report test failed pfn in new tracepoint
to analyze cma allocation failure problem. There is no functional change
in this patch.
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Acked-by: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
---
mm/page_isolation.c | 13 ++++++-------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/page_isolation.c b/mm/page_isolation.c
index 4568fd5..029a171 100644
--- a/mm/page_isolation.c
+++ b/mm/page_isolation.c
@@ -212,7 +212,7 @@ int undo_isolate_page_range(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn,
*
* Returns 1 if all pages in the range are isolated.
*/
-static int
+static unsigned long
__test_page_isolated_in_pageblock(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long end_pfn,
bool skip_hwpoisoned_pages)
{
@@ -237,9 +237,8 @@ __test_page_isolated_in_pageblock(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long end_pfn,
else
break;
}
- if (pfn < end_pfn)
- return 0;
- return 1;
+
+ return pfn;
}
int test_pages_isolated(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn,
@@ -248,7 +247,6 @@ int test_pages_isolated(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn,
unsigned long pfn, flags;
struct page *page;
struct zone *zone;
- int ret;
/*
* Note: pageblock_nr_pages != MAX_ORDER. Then, chunks of free pages
@@ -266,10 +264,11 @@ int test_pages_isolated(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn,
/* Check all pages are free or marked as ISOLATED */
zone = page_zone(page);
spin_lock_irqsave(&zone->lock, flags);
- ret = __test_page_isolated_in_pageblock(start_pfn, end_pfn,
+ pfn = __test_page_isolated_in_pageblock(start_pfn, end_pfn,
skip_hwpoisoned_pages);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
- return ret ? 0 : -EBUSY;
+
+ return pfn < end_pfn ? -EBUSY : 0;
}
struct page *alloc_migrate_target(struct page *page, unsigned long private,
--
1.9.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated
2015-11-13 2:23 [PATCH 1/3] mm/page_isolation: return last tested pfn rather than failure indicator Joonsoo Kim
@ 2015-11-13 2:23 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-13 22:51 ` David Rientjes
` (2 more replies)
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm/cma: always check which page cause allocation failure Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-24 14:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] mm/page_isolation: return last tested pfn rather than failure indicator Vlastimil Babka
2 siblings, 3 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Joonsoo Kim @ 2015-11-13 2:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Joonsoo Kim
cma allocation should be guranteeded to succeed, but, sometimes,
it could be failed in current implementation. To track down
the problem, we need to know which page is problematic and
this new tracepoint will report it.
Acked-by: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
---
include/trace/events/page_isolation.h | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
mm/page_isolation.c | 5 +++++
2 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 include/trace/events/page_isolation.h
diff --git a/include/trace/events/page_isolation.h b/include/trace/events/page_isolation.h
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6fb6440
--- /dev/null
+++ b/include/trace/events/page_isolation.h
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
+#undef TRACE_SYSTEM
+#define TRACE_SYSTEM page_isolation
+
+#if !defined(_TRACE_PAGE_ISOLATION_H) || defined(TRACE_HEADER_MULTI_READ)
+#define _TRACE_PAGE_ISOLATION_H
+
+#include <linux/tracepoint.h>
+
+TRACE_EVENT(test_pages_isolated,
+
+ TP_PROTO(
+ unsigned long start_pfn,
+ unsigned long end_pfn,
+ unsigned long fin_pfn),
+
+ TP_ARGS(start_pfn, end_pfn, fin_pfn),
+
+ TP_STRUCT__entry(
+ __field(unsigned long, start_pfn)
+ __field(unsigned long, end_pfn)
+ __field(unsigned long, fin_pfn)
+ ),
+
+ TP_fast_assign(
+ __entry->start_pfn = start_pfn;
+ __entry->end_pfn = end_pfn;
+ __entry->fin_pfn = fin_pfn;
+ ),
+
+ TP_printk("start_pfn=0x%lx end_pfn=0x%lx fin_pfn=0x%lx ret=%s",
+ __entry->start_pfn, __entry->end_pfn, __entry->fin_pfn,
+ __entry->end_pfn == __entry->fin_pfn ? "success" : "fail")
+);
+
+#endif /* _TRACE_PAGE_ISOLATION_H */
+
+/* This part must be outside protection */
+#include <trace/define_trace.h>
diff --git a/mm/page_isolation.c b/mm/page_isolation.c
index 029a171..f484b93 100644
--- a/mm/page_isolation.c
+++ b/mm/page_isolation.c
@@ -9,6 +9,9 @@
#include <linux/hugetlb.h>
#include "internal.h"
+#define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
+#include <trace/events/page_isolation.h>
+
static int set_migratetype_isolate(struct page *page,
bool skip_hwpoisoned_pages)
{
@@ -268,6 +271,8 @@ int test_pages_isolated(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn,
skip_hwpoisoned_pages);
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&zone->lock, flags);
+ trace_test_pages_isolated(start_pfn, end_pfn, pfn);
+
return pfn < end_pfn ? -EBUSY : 0;
}
--
1.9.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/3] mm/cma: always check which page cause allocation failure
2015-11-13 2:23 [PATCH 1/3] mm/page_isolation: return last tested pfn rather than failure indicator Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated Joonsoo Kim
@ 2015-11-13 2:23 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-24 15:27 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-11-24 14:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] mm/page_isolation: return last tested pfn rather than failure indicator Vlastimil Babka
2 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Joonsoo Kim @ 2015-11-13 2:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Joonsoo Kim
Now, we have tracepoint in test_pages_isolated() to notify
pfn which cannot be isolated. But, in alloc_contig_range(),
some error path doesn't call test_pages_isolated() so it's still
hard to know exact pfn that causes allocation failure.
This patch change this situation by calling test_pages_isolated()
in almost error path. In allocation failure case, some overhead
is added by this change, but, allocation failure is really rare
event so it would not matter.
In fatal signal pending case, we don't call test_pages_isolated()
because this failure is intentional one.
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
---
mm/page_alloc.c | 10 +++++++---
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index d89960d..e78d78f 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -6756,8 +6756,12 @@ int alloc_contig_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
if (ret)
return ret;
+ /*
+ * In case of -EBUSY, we'd like to know which page causes problem.
+ * So, just fall through. We will check it in test_pages_isolated().
+ */
ret = __alloc_contig_migrate_range(&cc, start, end);
- if (ret)
+ if (ret && ret != -EBUSY)
goto done;
/*
@@ -6784,8 +6788,8 @@ int alloc_contig_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
outer_start = start;
while (!PageBuddy(pfn_to_page(outer_start))) {
if (++order >= MAX_ORDER) {
- ret = -EBUSY;
- goto done;
+ outer_start = start;
+ break;
}
outer_start &= ~0UL << order;
}
--
1.9.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated Joonsoo Kim
@ 2015-11-13 22:51 ` David Rientjes
2015-11-19 23:34 ` Andrew Morton
2015-11-24 14:57 ` Vlastimil Babka
2 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: David Rientjes @ 2015-11-13 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joonsoo Kim
Cc: Andrew Morton, Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Joonsoo Kim
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> cma allocation should be guranteeded to succeed, but, sometimes,
> it could be failed in current implementation. To track down
> the problem, we need to know which page is problematic and
> this new tracepoint will report it.
>
> Acked-by: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Thanks for generalizing this!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-13 22:51 ` David Rientjes
@ 2015-11-19 23:34 ` Andrew Morton
2015-11-20 6:21 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-24 14:57 ` Vlastimil Babka
2 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Morton @ 2015-11-19 23:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joonsoo Kim
Cc: Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Joonsoo Kim, Steven Rostedt
On Fri, 13 Nov 2015 11:23:47 +0900 Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com> wrote:
> cma allocation should be guranteeded to succeed, but, sometimes,
> it could be failed in current implementation. To track down
> the problem, we need to know which page is problematic and
> this new tracepoint will report it.
akpm3:/usr/src/25> size mm/page_isolation.o
text data bss dec hex filename
2972 112 1096 4180 1054 mm/page_isolation.o-before
4608 570 1840 7018 1b6a mm/page_isolation.o-after
This seems an excessive amount of bloat for one little tracepoint. Is
this expected and normal (and acceptable)?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated
2015-11-19 23:34 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2015-11-20 6:21 ` Joonsoo Kim
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Joonsoo Kim @ 2015-11-20 6:21 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Steven Rostedt
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 03:34:11PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Nov 2015 11:23:47 +0900 Joonsoo Kim <js1304@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > cma allocation should be guranteeded to succeed, but, sometimes,
> > it could be failed in current implementation. To track down
> > the problem, we need to know which page is problematic and
> > this new tracepoint will report it.
>
> akpm3:/usr/src/25> size mm/page_isolation.o
> text data bss dec hex filename
> 2972 112 1096 4180 1054 mm/page_isolation.o-before
> 4608 570 1840 7018 1b6a mm/page_isolation.o-after
>
> This seems an excessive amount of bloat for one little tracepoint. Is
> this expected and normal (and acceptable)?
Hello,
I checked bloat on other tracepoints and found that it's normal.
It takes 1KB more per tracepoint.
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/3] mm/page_isolation: return last tested pfn rather than failure indicator
2015-11-13 2:23 [PATCH 1/3] mm/page_isolation: return last tested pfn rather than failure indicator Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm/cma: always check which page cause allocation failure Joonsoo Kim
@ 2015-11-24 14:57 ` Vlastimil Babka
2 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Vlastimil Babka @ 2015-11-24 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joonsoo Kim, Andrew Morton
Cc: Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Joonsoo Kim
On 11/13/2015 03:23 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> This is preparation step to report test failed pfn in new tracepoint
> to analyze cma allocation failure problem. There is no functional change
> in this patch.
>
> Acked-by: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Acked-by: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-13 22:51 ` David Rientjes
2015-11-19 23:34 ` Andrew Morton
@ 2015-11-24 14:57 ` Vlastimil Babka
2 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Vlastimil Babka @ 2015-11-24 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joonsoo Kim, Andrew Morton
Cc: Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Joonsoo Kim
On 11/13/2015 03:23 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> cma allocation should be guranteeded to succeed, but, sometimes,
> it could be failed in current implementation. To track down
> the problem, we need to know which page is problematic and
> this new tracepoint will report it.
>
> Acked-by: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@mina86.com>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/cma: always check which page cause allocation failure
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm/cma: always check which page cause allocation failure Joonsoo Kim
@ 2015-11-24 15:27 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-11-25 2:39 ` Joonsoo Kim
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Vlastimil Babka @ 2015-11-24 15:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joonsoo Kim, Andrew Morton
Cc: Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Joonsoo Kim
On 11/13/2015 03:23 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> Now, we have tracepoint in test_pages_isolated() to notify
> pfn which cannot be isolated. But, in alloc_contig_range(),
> some error path doesn't call test_pages_isolated() so it's still
> hard to know exact pfn that causes allocation failure.
>
> This patch change this situation by calling test_pages_isolated()
> in almost error path. In allocation failure case, some overhead
> is added by this change, but, allocation failure is really rare
> event so it would not matter.
>
> In fatal signal pending case, we don't call test_pages_isolated()
> because this failure is intentional one.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> ---
> mm/page_alloc.c | 10 +++++++---
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index d89960d..e78d78f 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -6756,8 +6756,12 @@ int alloc_contig_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + /*
> + * In case of -EBUSY, we'd like to know which page causes problem.
> + * So, just fall through. We will check it in test_pages_isolated().
> + */
> ret = __alloc_contig_migrate_range(&cc, start, end);
> - if (ret)
> + if (ret && ret != -EBUSY)
> goto done;
>
> /*
> @@ -6784,8 +6788,8 @@ int alloc_contig_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
> outer_start = start;
> while (!PageBuddy(pfn_to_page(outer_start))) {
> if (++order >= MAX_ORDER) {
> - ret = -EBUSY;
> - goto done;
> + outer_start = start;
> + break;
> }
> outer_start &= ~0UL << order;
> }
Ugh isn't this crazy loop broken? Shouldn't it test that the buddy it
finds has order high enough? e.g.:
buddy = pfn_to_page(outer_start)
outer_start + (1UL << page_order(buddy)) > start
Otherwise you might end up with something like:
- at "start" there's a page that CMA failed to freed
- at "start-1" there's another non-buddy page
- at "start-3" there's an order-1 buddy, so you set outer_start to start-3
- test_pages_isolated() will complain (via the new tracepoint) about pfn
of start-1, but actually you would like it to complain about pfn of "start"?
So the loop has been broken before your patch, but it didn't matter,
just potentially wasted some time by picking bogus outer_start. But now
your tracepoint will give you weird results.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/3] mm/cma: always check which page cause allocation failure
2015-11-24 15:27 ` Vlastimil Babka
@ 2015-11-25 2:39 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-25 5:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Joonsoo Kim
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Joonsoo Kim @ 2015-11-25 2:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Vlastimil Babka
Cc: Andrew Morton, Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes,
linux-mm, linux-kernel
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 04:27:56PM +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 11/13/2015 03:23 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> >Now, we have tracepoint in test_pages_isolated() to notify
> >pfn which cannot be isolated. But, in alloc_contig_range(),
> >some error path doesn't call test_pages_isolated() so it's still
> >hard to know exact pfn that causes allocation failure.
> >
> >This patch change this situation by calling test_pages_isolated()
> >in almost error path. In allocation failure case, some overhead
> >is added by this change, but, allocation failure is really rare
> >event so it would not matter.
> >
> >In fatal signal pending case, we don't call test_pages_isolated()
> >because this failure is intentional one.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> >---
> > mm/page_alloc.c | 10 +++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> >index d89960d..e78d78f 100644
> >--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> >+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> >@@ -6756,8 +6756,12 @@ int alloc_contig_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
> > if (ret)
> > return ret;
> >
> >+ /*
> >+ * In case of -EBUSY, we'd like to know which page causes problem.
> >+ * So, just fall through. We will check it in test_pages_isolated().
> >+ */
> > ret = __alloc_contig_migrate_range(&cc, start, end);
> >- if (ret)
> >+ if (ret && ret != -EBUSY)
> > goto done;
> >
> > /*
> >@@ -6784,8 +6788,8 @@ int alloc_contig_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
> > outer_start = start;
> > while (!PageBuddy(pfn_to_page(outer_start))) {
> > if (++order >= MAX_ORDER) {
> >- ret = -EBUSY;
> >- goto done;
> >+ outer_start = start;
> >+ break;
> > }
> > outer_start &= ~0UL << order;
> > }
>
> Ugh isn't this crazy loop broken? Shouldn't it test that the buddy
> it finds has order high enough? e.g.:
> buddy = pfn_to_page(outer_start)
> outer_start + (1UL << page_order(buddy)) > start
>
> Otherwise you might end up with something like:
> - at "start" there's a page that CMA failed to freed
> - at "start-1" there's another non-buddy page
> - at "start-3" there's an order-1 buddy, so you set outer_start to start-3
> - test_pages_isolated() will complain (via the new tracepoint) about
> pfn of start-1, but actually you would like it to complain about pfn
> of "start"?
>
> So the loop has been broken before your patch, but it didn't matter,
> just potentially wasted some time by picking bogus outer_start. But
> now your tracepoint will give you weird results.
Good catch. I will fix it.
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v2] mm/cma: always check which page cause allocation failure
2015-11-25 2:39 ` Joonsoo Kim
@ 2015-11-25 5:32 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-25 10:45 ` Vlastimil Babka
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Joonsoo Kim @ 2015-11-25 5:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton
Cc: Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Vlastimil Babka, Joonsoo Kim
Now, we have tracepoint in test_pages_isolated() to notify
pfn which cannot be isolated. But, in alloc_contig_range(),
some error path doesn't call test_pages_isolated() so it's still
hard to know exact pfn that causes allocation failure.
This patch change this situation by calling test_pages_isolated()
in almost error path. In allocation failure case, some overhead
is added by this change, but, allocation failure is really rare
event so it would not matter.
In fatal signal pending case, we don't call test_pages_isolated()
because this failure is intentional one.
There was a bogus outer_start problem due to unchecked buddy order
and this patch also fix it. Before this patch, it didn't matter,
because end result is same thing. But, after this patch,
tracepoint will report failed pfn so it should be accurate.
Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
---
mm/page_alloc.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
index d0499ff..21e9172 100644
--- a/mm/page_alloc.c
+++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
@@ -6748,8 +6748,12 @@ int alloc_contig_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
if (ret)
return ret;
+ /*
+ * In case of -EBUSY, we'd like to know which page causes problem.
+ * So, just fall through. We will check it in test_pages_isolated().
+ */
ret = __alloc_contig_migrate_range(&cc, start, end);
- if (ret)
+ if (ret && ret != -EBUSY)
goto done;
/*
@@ -6776,12 +6780,25 @@ int alloc_contig_range(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
outer_start = start;
while (!PageBuddy(pfn_to_page(outer_start))) {
if (++order >= MAX_ORDER) {
- ret = -EBUSY;
- goto done;
+ outer_start = start;
+ break;
}
outer_start &= ~0UL << order;
}
+ if (outer_start != start) {
+ order = page_order(pfn_to_page(outer_start));
+
+ /*
+ * outer_start page could be small order buddy page and
+ * it doesn't include start page. Adjust outer_start
+ * in this case to report failed page properly
+ * on tracepoint in test_pages_isolated()
+ */
+ if (outer_start + (1UL << order) <= start)
+ outer_start = start;
+ }
+
/* Make sure the range is really isolated. */
if (test_pages_isolated(outer_start, end, false)) {
pr_info("%s: [%lx, %lx) PFNs busy\n",
--
1.9.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] mm/cma: always check which page cause allocation failure
2015-11-25 5:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Joonsoo Kim
@ 2015-11-25 10:45 ` Vlastimil Babka
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Vlastimil Babka @ 2015-11-25 10:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joonsoo Kim, Andrew Morton
Cc: Michal Nazarewicz, Minchan Kim, David Rientjes, linux-mm,
linux-kernel, Joonsoo Kim
On 11/25/2015 06:32 AM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> Now, we have tracepoint in test_pages_isolated() to notify
> pfn which cannot be isolated. But, in alloc_contig_range(),
> some error path doesn't call test_pages_isolated() so it's still
> hard to know exact pfn that causes allocation failure.
>
> This patch change this situation by calling test_pages_isolated()
> in almost error path. In allocation failure case, some overhead
> is added by this change, but, allocation failure is really rare
> event so it would not matter.
>
> In fatal signal pending case, we don't call test_pages_isolated()
> because this failure is intentional one.
>
> There was a bogus outer_start problem due to unchecked buddy order
> and this patch also fix it. Before this patch, it didn't matter,
> because end result is same thing. But, after this patch,
> tracepoint will report failed pfn so it should be accurate.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
Acked-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-11-25 10:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-11-13 2:23 [PATCH 1/3] mm/page_isolation: return last tested pfn rather than failure indicator Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 2/3] mm/page_isolation: add new tracepoint, test_pages_isolated Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-13 22:51 ` David Rientjes
2015-11-19 23:34 ` Andrew Morton
2015-11-20 6:21 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-24 14:57 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-11-13 2:23 ` [PATCH 3/3] mm/cma: always check which page cause allocation failure Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-24 15:27 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-11-25 2:39 ` Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-25 5:32 ` [PATCH v2] " Joonsoo Kim
2015-11-25 10:45 ` Vlastimil Babka
2015-11-24 14:57 ` [PATCH 1/3] mm/page_isolation: return last tested pfn rather than failure indicator Vlastimil Babka
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).