[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f8e7eaca-e9f1-0ed1-a9f9-1dff81b13814@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 17:49:23 +0800
From: Jia He <hejianet@...il.com>
To: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...il.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>,
Daniel Jordan <daniel.m.jordan@...cle.com>,
AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@...aro.org>,
Gioh Kim <gi-oh.kim@...fitbricks.com>,
Steven Sistare <steven.sistare@...cle.com>,
Daniel Vacek <neelx@...hat.com>,
Eugeniu Rosca <erosca@...adit-jv.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org, James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Steve Capper <steve.capper@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@...b.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Kemi Wang <kemi.wang@...el.com>,
Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.com>,
YASUAKI ISHIMATSU <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <aryabinin@...tuozzo.com>,
Nikolay Borisov <nborisov@...e.com>,
Jia He <jia.he@...-semitech.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] mm: page_alloc: remain memblock_next_valid_pfn()
when CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID is enable
On 3/28/2018 5:18 PM, Wei Yang Wrote:
> Oops, I should reply this thread. Forget about the reply on another thread.
>
> On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 08:02:15PM -0700, Jia He wrote:
>> Commit b92df1de5d28 ("mm: page_alloc: skip over regions of invalid pfns
>> where possible") optimized the loop in memmap_init_zone(). But it causes
>> possible panic bug. So Daniel Vacek reverted it later.
>>
> Why this has a bug? Do you have some link about it?
>
> If the audience could know the potential risk, it would be helpful to review
> the code and decide whether to take it back.
Hi Wei
Paul firstly submit a commit b92df1de5 to improve the loop in
memmap_init_zone.
And Daniel tried to fix a bug_on panic issue on X86 in commit
864b75f9d6b because
there is evidence that this bug_on was caused by b92df1de5 [1].
But things didn't get better, 864b75f9d6b caused booting hang issue on
arm{64} [2]
So maintainer decided to reverted both b92df1de5 and 864b75f9d6b
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10251145/
[2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/14/469
>
>> But memblock_next_valid_pfn is valid when CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID is
>> enable. And as verified by Eugeniu Rosca, arm can benifit from this
>> commit. So remain the memblock_next_valid_pfn.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jia He <jia.he@...-semitech.com>
>> ---
>> include/linux/memblock.h | 4 ++++
>> mm/memblock.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> mm/page_alloc.c | 11 ++++++++++-
>> 3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/memblock.h b/include/linux/memblock.h
>> index 0257aee..efbbe4b 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/memblock.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/memblock.h
>> @@ -203,6 +203,10 @@ void __next_mem_pfn_range(int *idx, int nid, unsigned long *out_start_pfn,
>> i >= 0; __next_mem_pfn_range(&i, nid, p_start, p_end, p_nid))
>> #endif /* CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP */
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID
>> +unsigned long memblock_next_valid_pfn(unsigned long pfn);
>> +#endif
>> +
>> /**
>> * for_each_free_mem_range - iterate through free memblock areas
>> * @i: u64 used as loop variable
>> diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
>> index ba7c878..bea5a9c 100644
>> --- a/mm/memblock.c
>> +++ b/mm/memblock.c
>> @@ -1102,6 +1102,35 @@ void __init_memblock __next_mem_pfn_range(int *idx, int nid,
>> *out_nid = r->nid;
>> }
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID
>> +unsigned long __init_memblock memblock_next_valid_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
>> +{
>> + struct memblock_type *type = &memblock.memory;
>> + unsigned int right = type->cnt;
>> + unsigned int mid, left = 0;
>> + phys_addr_t addr = PFN_PHYS(++pfn);
>> +
>> + do {
>> + mid = (right + left) / 2;
>> +
>> + if (addr < type->regions[mid].base)
>> + right = mid;
>> + else if (addr >= (type->regions[mid].base +
>> + type->regions[mid].size))
>> + left = mid + 1;
>> + else {
>> + /* addr is within the region, so pfn is valid */
>> + return pfn;
>> + }
>> + } while (left < right);
>> +
>> + if (right == type->cnt)
>> + return -1UL;
>> + else
>> + return PHYS_PFN(type->regions[right].base);
>> +}
>> +#endif /*CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID*/
>> +
>> /**
>> * memblock_set_node - set node ID on memblock regions
>> * @base: base of area to set node ID for
>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> index c19f5ac..2a967f7 100644
>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -5483,8 +5483,17 @@ void __meminit memmap_init_zone(unsigned long size, int nid, unsigned long zone,
>> if (context != MEMMAP_EARLY)
>> goto not_early;
>>
>> - if (!early_pfn_valid(pfn))
>> + if (!early_pfn_valid(pfn)) {
>> +#if (defined CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK) && (defined CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID)
> In commit b92df1de5d28, it use CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP.
>
> Not get the point of your change.
Please get more information about the reason why using
CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK in
d49d47e mm: page_alloc: skip over regions of invalid pfns on UMA
And this commit is dependent on b92df1de, so it is also reverted.
Cheers,
Jia
>
>> + /*
>> + * Skip to the pfn preceding the next valid one (or
>> + * end_pfn), such that we hit a valid pfn (or end_pfn)
>> + * on our next iteration of the loop.
>> + */
>> + pfn = memblock_next_valid_pfn(pfn) - 1;
>> +#endif
>> continue;
>> + }
>> if (!early_pfn_in_nid(pfn, nid))
>> continue;
>> if (!update_defer_init(pgdat, pfn, end_pfn, &nr_initialised))
>> --
>> 2.7.4
--
Cheers,
Jia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists