Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752143AbdDCUm1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 16:42:27 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:40742 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751646AbdDCUmZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Apr 2017 16:42:25 -0400 Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2017 15:42:13 -0500 From: Reza Arbab To: Michal Hocko Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Mel Gorman , Vlastimil Babka , Andrea Arcangeli , Yasuaki Ishimatsu , Tang Chen , qiuxishi@huawei.com, Kani Toshimitsu , slaoub@gmail.com, Joonsoo Kim , Andi Kleen , Zhang Zhen , David Rientjes , Daniel Kiper , Igor Mammedov , Vitaly Kuznetsov , LKML , Chris Metcalf , Dan Williams , Heiko Carstens , Lai Jiangshan , Martin Schwidefsky Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] mm: make movable onlining suck less References: <20170330115454.32154-1-mhocko@kernel.org> <20170403115545.GK24661@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20170403195830.64libncet5l6vuvb@arbab-laptop> <20170403202337.GA12482@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170403202337.GA12482@dhcp22.suse.cz> Organization: IBM Linux Technology Center User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170306 (1.8.0) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 17040320-0044-0000-0000-000002F4DD97 X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00006877; HX=3.00000240; KW=3.00000007; PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000208; SDB=6.00842631; UDB=6.00415090; IPR=6.00620806; BA=6.00005262; NDR=6.00000001; ZLA=6.00000005; ZF=6.00000009; ZB=6.00000000; ZP=6.00000000; ZH=6.00000000; ZU=6.00000002; MB=3.00014892; XFM=3.00000013; UTC=2017-04-03 20:42:22 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 17040320-0045-0000-0000-00000722DD64 Message-Id: <20170403204213.rs7k2cvsnconel2z@arbab-laptop> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:,, definitions=2017-04-03_19:,, signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1702020001 definitions=main-1704030183 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2052 Lines: 55 On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 10:23:38PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: >On Mon 03-04-17 14:58:30, Reza Arbab wrote: >> However, I am seeing a regression. When adding memory to a memoryless >> node, it shows up in node 0 instead. I'm digging to see if I can help >> narrow down where things go wrong. > >OK, I guess I know what is going on here. online_pages relies on >pfn_to_nid(pfn) to return a proper node. But we are doing >page_to_nid(pfn_to_page(__pfn_to_nid_pfn)) so we rely on the page being >properly initialized. Damn, I should have noticed that. There are two >ways around that. Either the __add_section stores the nid into the >struct page and make page_to_nid reliable or store it somewhere else >(ideally into the memblock). The first is easier (let's do it for now) >but longterm we do not want to rely on the struct page at all I believe. > >Does the following help? >--- >diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c >index b9dc1c4e26c3..0e21b9f67c9d 100644 >--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c >+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c >@@ -309,14 +309,19 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid, unsigned long phys_start_pfn) > > /* > * Make all the pages reserved so that nobody will stumble over half >- * initialized state. >+ * initialized state. >+ * FIXME: We also have to associate it with a node because pfn_to_node >+ * relies on having page with the proper node. > */ > for (i = 0; i < PAGES_PER_SECTION; i++) { > unsigned long pfn = phys_start_pfn + i; >+ struct page *page; > if (!pfn_valid(pfn)) > continue; > >- SetPageReserved(pfn_to_page(phys_start_pfn + i)); >+ page = pfn_to_page(pfn); >+ set_page_node(page, nid); >+ SetPageReserved(page); > } > > return register_new_memory(nid, __pfn_to_section(phys_start_pfn)); Almost there. I'm seeing the memory in the correct node now, but the /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/memoryY links are not being created. I think it's tripping up here, in register_mem_sect_under_node(): page_nid = get_nid_for_pfn(pfn); if (page_nid < 0) continue; -- Reza Arbab