lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 10:48:52 -0500 From: Reza Arbab <arbab@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> Cc: Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>, Yasuaki Ishimatsu <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>, Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>, qiuxishi@...wei.com, Kani Toshimitsu <toshi.kani@....com>, slaoub@...il.com, Joonsoo Kim <js1304@...il.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Zhang Zhen <zhenzhang.zhang@...wei.com>, David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>, Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>, Igor Mammedov <imammedo@...hat.com>, Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...lanox.com>, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...il.com>, Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>, Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] mm: make movable onlining suck less On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 08:42:39AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: >On Tue 04-04-17 16:43:39, Reza Arbab wrote: >> Okay, getting further. With this I can again repeatedly add and >> remove, but now I'm seeing a weird variation of that earlier issue: >> >> 1. add_memory(), online_movable >> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/memoryY symlinks are created. >> >> 2. offline, remove_memory() >> The node is offlined, since all memory has been removed, so all of >> /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX is gone. This is normal. >> >> 3. add_memory(), online_movable >> The node is onlined, so /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX is recreated, >> and the memory is added, but just like earlier in this email thread, >> the memoryY links are not there. > >Could you add some printks to see why the sysfs creation failed please? Ah, simple enough. It's this, right at the top of register_mem_sect_under_node(): if (!node_online(nid)) return 0; That being the case, I really don't understand why your patches make any difference. Is node_set_online() being called later than before somehow? -- Reza Arbab
Powered by blists - more mailing lists