[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080826092929.GD29207@brain>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:29:29 +0100
From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
To: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
Cc: Adam Litke <agl@...ibm.com>, Dave Hansen <dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
nacc <nacc@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, agl <agl@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] [PATCH v2] Make setup_zone_migrate_reserve() aware of
overlapping nodes
On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 12:33:39PM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On (20/08/08 14:55), Adam Litke didst pronounce:
> > Changes since V1
> > - Fix build for !NUMA
> > - Add VM_BUG_ON() to catch this problem at the source
> >
> > I have gotten to the root cause of the hugetlb badness I reported back on
> > August 15th. My system has the following memory topology (note the
> > overlapping node):
> >
> > Node 0 Memory: 0x8000000-0x44000000
> > Node 1 Memory: 0x0-0x8000000 0x44000000-0x80000000
> >
> > setup_zone_migrate_reserve() scans the address range 0x0-0x8000000 looking
> > for a pageblock to move onto the MIGRATE_RESERVE list. Finding no
> > candidates, it happily continues the scan into 0x8000000-0x44000000. When
> > a pageblock is found, the pages are moved to the MIGRATE_RESERVE list on
> > the wrong zone. Oops.
> >
> > (Andrew: once the proper fix is agreed upon, this should also be a
> > candidate for -stable.)
> >
> > setup_zone_migrate_reserve() should skip pageblocks in overlapping nodes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Adam Litke <agl@...ibm.com>
> >
>
> zone_to_nid(zone) is called every time in the loop even though it will never
> change. This is less than optimal but setup_zone_migrate_reserve() is only
> called during init and when min_free_kbytes is adjusted so it's not worth
> worrying about. Otherwise it looks good.
>
> Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>
>
> > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > index af982f7..feb7916 100644
> > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > @@ -694,6 +694,9 @@ static int move_freepages(struct zone *zone,
> > #endif
> >
> > for (page = start_page; page <= end_page;) {
> > + /* Make sure we are not inadvertently changing nodes */
> > + VM_BUG_ON(page_to_nid(page) != zone_to_nid(zone));
> > +
> > if (!pfn_valid_within(page_to_pfn(page))) {
> > page++;
> > continue;
> > @@ -2516,6 +2519,10 @@ static void setup_zone_migrate_reserve(struct zone *zone)
> > continue;
> > page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
> >
> > + /* Watch out for overlapping nodes */
> > + if (page_to_nid(page) != zone_to_nid(zone))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > /* Blocks with reserved pages will never free, skip them. */
> > if (PageReserved(page))
> > continue;
This patch looks sane. I do note that we have a config option to tell
us whether we have any possibility of overlapping nodes, and we have an
early version of a check for this early_pfn_in_nid() in mm.h. You might
consider having a non-early variant of this which could be optimised
away for those arches which do not have CONFIG_NODES_SPAN_OTHER_NODES.
In 'unearlifying' this to pfn_in_nid() I think we have a small naming
issue with these function as they are only valid for use with pfns within
an existing node. They should probabally both be *pfn_in_nid_within()
or something in line with pfn_valid_within().
-apw
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists