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:   Tue, 5 Feb 2019 10:08:53 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/21] memblock: refactor internal allocation
 functions
Message-ID: <20190205100853.76425a4b@canb.auug.org.au>
In-Reply-To: <878sywndr6.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
References: <1548057848-15136-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com>
        <1548057848-15136-11-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com>
        <87ftt5nrcn.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
        <20190203113915.GC8620@rapoport-lnx>
        <878sywndr6.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
 boundary="Sig_/OzwveUY.oxkkzj/x37Y1z+B"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

--Sig_/OzwveUY.oxkkzj/x37Y1z+B
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi all,

On Mon, 04 Feb 2019 19:45:17 +1100 Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wr=
ote:
>
> Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> writes:
> > On Sun, Feb 03, 2019 at 08:39:20PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: =20
> >> Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> writes: =20
> >> > Currently, memblock has several internal functions with overlapping
> >> > functionality. They all call memblock_find_in_range_node() to find f=
ree
> >> > memory and then reserve the allocated range and mark it with kmemlea=
k.
> >> > However, there is difference in the allocation constraints and in fa=
llback
> >> > strategies. =20
> ...
> >>=20
> >> This is causing problems on some of my machines. =20
> ...
> >>=20
> >> On some of my other systems it does that, and then panics because it
> >> can't allocate anything at all:
> >>=20
> >> [    0.000000] numa:   NODE_DATA [mem 0x7ffcaee80-0x7ffcb3fff]
> >> [    0.000000] numa:   NODE_DATA [mem 0x7ffc99d00-0x7ffc9ee7f]
> >> [    0.000000] numa:     NODE_DATA(1) on node 0
> >> [    0.000000] Kernel panic - not syncing: Cannot allocate 20864 bytes=
 for node 16 data
> >> [    0.000000] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper Not tainted 5.0.0-rc4-gccN-=
next-20190201-gdc4c899 #1
> >> [    0.000000] Call Trace:
> >> [    0.000000] [c0000000011cfca0] [c000000000c11044] dump_stack+0xe8/0=
x164 (unreliable)
> >> [    0.000000] [c0000000011cfcf0] [c0000000000fdd6c] panic+0x17c/0x3e0
> >> [    0.000000] [c0000000011cfd90] [c000000000f61bc8] initmem_init+0x12=
8/0x260
> >> [    0.000000] [c0000000011cfe60] [c000000000f57940] setup_arch+0x398/=
0x418
> >> [    0.000000] [c0000000011cfee0] [c000000000f50a94] start_kernel+0xa0=
/0x684
> >> [    0.000000] [c0000000011cff90] [c00000000000af70] start_here_common=
+0x1c/0x52c
> >> [    0.000000] Rebooting in 180 seconds..
> >>=20
> >>=20
> >> So there's something going wrong there, I haven't had time to dig into
> >> it though (Sunday night here). =20
> >
> > Yeah, I've misplaced 'nid' and 'MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE' in
> > memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid() :(
> >
> > Can you please check if the below patch fixes the issue on your systems=
? =20
>=20
> Yes it does, thanks.
>=20
> Tested-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
>=20
> cheers
>=20
>=20
> > From 5875b7440e985ce551e6da3cb28aa8e9af697e10 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> > Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 13:35:42 +0200
> > Subject: [PATCH] memblock: fix parameter order in
> >  memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid()
> >
> > The refactoring of internal memblock allocation functions used wrong or=
der
> > of parameters in memblock_alloc_range_nid() call from
> > memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid().
> > Fix it.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >  mm/memblock.c | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
> > index e047933..0151a5b 100644
> > --- a/mm/memblock.c
> > +++ b/mm/memblock.c
> > @@ -1402,8 +1402,8 @@ phys_addr_t __init memblock_phys_alloc_range(phys=
_addr_t size,
> > =20
> >  phys_addr_t __init memblock_phys_alloc_try_nid(phys_addr_t size, phys_=
addr_t align, int nid)
> >  {
> > -	return memblock_alloc_range_nid(size, align, 0, nid,
> > -					MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE);
> > +	return memblock_alloc_range_nid(size, align, 0,
> > +					MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE, nid);
> >  }
> > =20
> >  /**
> > --=20
> > 2.7.4

I have applied that patch to the akpm tree in linux-next from today.

--=20
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

--Sig_/OzwveUY.oxkkzj/x37Y1z+B
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEENIC96giZ81tWdLgKAVBC80lX0GwFAlxYxgUACgkQAVBC80lX
0GxEuAf9GsugDDdRCLDmTMD00eIytyOVIEpA9SyPp6+OfJFr6LAe4od3NRsvyLHo
qt5zEPzj9VXyImq9gQF3NxuITf21Jo4a260SueoJ9/tMLpcxvqb/e8/S5isnJV/j
IPRYpZoynZW1VIv03G04Q5NZe9MtAECrYd0pqva8SbxDBMnbisbU0iht4kpZGWAg
6uroMUsJmIzIYM6K5AHwqxi4cSHtZA+ft/qTbbTxExIs1e9LmmDzSEZ9SlSO0xD+
NL9+pT3mDDP+YqHhEWq/cnBmYm1IMoLpXDnevH9TRhaLsdlBm07Tu2j1zcMn1Bb6
l7AHZto9y6UlB9AjC/KE+LHFK61c+g==
=lBAx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Sig_/OzwveUY.oxkkzj/x37Y1z+B--