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;
Message-ID: <1542364721.3020.5.camel@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] mm, memory_hotplug: print reason for the offlining
 failure
From:   osalvador <osalvador@suse.com>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>,
        Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Date:   Fri, 16 Nov 2018 11:38:41 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20181116083020.20260-5-mhocko@kernel.org>
References: <20181116083020.20260-1-mhocko@kernel.org>
         <20181116083020.20260-5-mhocko@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 2018-11-16 at 09:30 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
> 
> The memory offlining failure reporting is inconsistent and
> insufficient.
> Some error paths simply do not report the failure to the log at all.
> When we do report there are no details about the reason of the
> failure
> and there are several of them which makes memory offlining failures
> hard to debug.
> 
> Make sure that the
> 	memory offlining [mem %#010llx-%#010llx] failed
> message is printed for all failures and also provide a short textual
> reason for the failure e.g.
> 
> [ 1984.506184] rac1 kernel: memory offlining [mem 0x82600000000-
> 0x8267fffffff] failed due to signal backoff
> 
> this tells us that the offlining has failed because of a signal
> pending
> aka user intervention.
> 
> [akpm: tweak messages a bit]
> Signed-off-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>

Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>