Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 10 Oct 2018 20:52:42 +0200
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To:     Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org>,
        Pasha Tatashin <pavel.tatashin@microsoft.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        =?iso-8859-1?B?Suly9G1l?= Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>,
        rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
        yi.z.zhang@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] mm: Defer ZONE_DEVICE page initialization to the
 point where we init pgmap
Message-ID: <20181010185242.GP5873@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <20180925200551.3576.18755.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
 <20180925202053.3576.66039.stgit@localhost.localdomain>
 <20181009170051.GA40606@tiger-server>
 <CAPcyv4g99_rJJSn0kWv5YO0Mzj90q1LH1wC3XrjCh1=x6mo7BQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <25092df0-b7b4-d456-8409-9c004cb6e422@linux.intel.com>
 <20181010095838.GG5873@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <f97de51c-67dd-99b2-754e-0685cac06699@linux.intel.com>
 <20181010172451.GK5873@dhcp22.suse.cz>
 <98c35e19-13b9-0913-87d9-b3f1ab738b61@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <98c35e19-13b9-0913-87d9-b3f1ab738b61@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed 10-10-18 10:39:01, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On 10/10/2018 10:24 AM, Michal Hocko wrote:
[...]
> > I thought I have already made it clear that these zone device hacks are
> > not acceptable to the generic hotplug code. If the current reserve bit
> > handling is not correct then give us a specific reason for that and we
> > can start thinking about the proper fix.
> 
> I might have misunderstood your earlier comment then. I thought you were
> saying that we shouldn't bother with setting the reserved bit. Now it sounds
> like you were thinking more along the lines of what I was here in my comment
> where I thought the bit should be cleared later in some code specifically
> related to DAX when it is exposing it for use to userspace or KVM.

It seems I managed to confuse myself completely. Sorry, it's been a long
day and I am sick so the brain doesn't work all that well. I will get
back to this tomorrow or on Friday with a fresh brain.

My recollection was that we do clear the reserved bit in
move_pfn_range_to_zone and we indeed do in __init_single_page. But then
we set the bit back right afterwards. This seems to be the case since
d0dc12e86b319 which reorganized the code. I have to study this some more
obviously.

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs