[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <83B24C03-1484-4DD6-9B42-029FF1B27287@lca.pw>
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 08:16:59 -0500
From: Qian Cai <cai@....pw>
To: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
"Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm, debug_pagealloc: don't rely on static keys too early
> On Dec 19, 2019, at 8:06 AM, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz> wrote:
>
> Commit 96a2b03f281d ("mm, debug_pagelloc: use static keys to enable debugging")
> has introduced a static key to reduce overhead when debug_pagealloc is compiled
> in but not enabled. It relied on the assumption that jump_label_init() is
> called before parse_early_param() as in start_kernel(), so when the
> "debug_pagealloc=on" option is parsed, it is safe to enable the static key.
>
> However, it turns out multiple architectures call parse_early_param() earlier
> from their setup_arch(). x86 also calls jump_label_init() even earlier, so no
> issue was found while testing the commit, but same is not true for e.g. ppc64
> and s390 where the kernel would not boot with debug_pagealloc=on as found by
> our QA.
This was daily tested on linux-next here for those arches and never saw an issue. Are you able to reproduce it on mainline or linux-next?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists