[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <d338b385-626b-0e79-9944-708178fe245d@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2018 10:14:49 -0500
From: Michael Bringmann <mwb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Tyrel Datwyler <tyreld@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Thomas Falcon <tlfalcon@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Mathieu Malaterre <malat@...ian.org>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...cle.com>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mauricfo@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Juliet Kim <minkim@...ibm.com>,
Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Nathan Fontenot <nfont@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
YASUAKI ISHIMATSU <yasu.isimatu@...il.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] migration/mm: Add WARN_ON to try_offline_node
On 10/02/2018 09:59 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Tue 02-10-18 09:51:40, Michael Bringmann wrote:
> [...]
>> When the device-tree affinity attributes have changed for memory,
>> the 'nid' affinity calculated points to a different node for the
>> memory block than the one used to install it, previously on the
>> source system. The newly calculated 'nid' affinity may not yet
>> be initialized on the target system. The current memory tracking
>> mechanisms do not record the node to which a memory block was
>> associated when it was added. Nathan is looking at adding this
>> feature to the new implementation of LMBs, but it is not there
>> yet, and won't be present in earlier kernels without backporting a
>> significant number of changes.
>
> Then the patch you have proposed here just papers over a real issue, no?
> IIUC then you simply do not remove the memory if you lose the race.
The problem occurs when removing memory after an affinity change references a node that was previously unreferenced. Other code in 'kernel/mm/memory_hotplug.c' deals with initializing an empty node when adding memory to a system. The 'removing memory' case is specific to systems that perform LPM and allow device-tree changes. The powerpc kernel does not have the option of accepting some PRRN requests and accepting others. It must perform them all.
The kernel/mm code that removes memory blocks does not (before this patch) recognize that the affinity of a memory block could have changed to a previously unused node. If every path to try_offline_node made such a check, then this patch would be unnecessary. However, putting a patch at a single location to check for a relatively rare occurrence, would seem to be a more efficient implementation.
Michael
--
Michael W. Bringmann
Linux Technology Center
IBM Corporation
Tie-Line 363-5196
External: (512) 286-5196
Cell: (512) 466-0650
mwb@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists