[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9f351a549e76483d9148f87535567ea0@SN2PR03MB061.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:21:08 +0000
From: KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
CC: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
"olaf@...fle.de" <olaf@...fle.de>,
"apw@...onical.com" <apw@...onical.com>,
"andi@...stfloor.org" <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"kamezawa.hiroyuki@...il.com" <kamezawa.hiroyuki@...il.com>,
"hannes@...xchg.org" <hannes@...xchg.org>,
"yinghan@...gle.com" <yinghan@...gle.com>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"kay@...y.org" <kay@...y.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] Drivers: base: memory: Export symbols for onlining
memory blocks
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Hansen [mailto:dave.hansen@...el.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 12:01 PM
> To: KY Srinivasan
> Cc: Michal Hocko; gregkh@...uxfoundation.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> devel@...uxdriverproject.org; olaf@...fle.de; apw@...onical.com;
> andi@...stfloor.org; akpm@...ux-foundation.org; linux-mm@...ck.org;
> kamezawa.hiroyuki@...il.com; hannes@...xchg.org; yinghan@...gle.com;
> jasowang@...hat.com; kay@...y.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Drivers: base: memory: Export symbols for onlining
> memory blocks
>
> On 07/23/2013 08:54 AM, KY Srinivasan wrote:
> >> > Adding memory usually requires allocating some large, contiguous areas
> >> > of memory for use as mem_map[] and other VM structures. That's really
> >> > hard to do under heavy memory pressure. How are you accomplishing this?
> > I cannot avoid failures because of lack of memory. In this case I notify the host
> of
> > the failure and also tag the failure as transient. Host retries the operation after
> some
> > delay. There is no guarantee it will succeed though.
>
> You didn't really answer the question.
>
> You have allocated some large, physically contiguous areas of memory
> under heavy pressure. But you also contend that there is too much
> memory pressure to run a small userspace helper. Under heavy memory
> pressure, I'd expect large, kernel allocations to fail much more often
> than running a small userspace helper.
I am only reporting what I am seeing. Broadly, I have two main failure conditions to
deal with: (a) resource related failure (add_memory() returning -ENOMEM) and (b) not being
able to online a segment that has been successfully hot-added. I have seen both these failures
under high memory pressure. By supporting "in context" onlining, we can eliminate one failure
case. Our inability to online is not a recoverable failure from the host's point of view - the memory
is committed to the guest (since hot add succeeded) but is not usable since it is not onlined.
>
> It _sounds_ like you really want to be able to have the host retry the
> operation if it fails, and you return success/failure from inside the
> kernel. It's hard for you to tell if running the userspace helper
> failed, so your solution is to move what what previously done in
> userspace in to the kernel so that you can more easily tell if it failed
> or succeeded.
>
> Is that right?
No; I am able to get the proper error code for recoverable failures (hot add failures
because of lack of memory). By doing what I am proposing here, we can avoid one class
of failures completely and I think this is what resulted in a better "hot add" experience in the
guest.
K. Y
>
>
--
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