Received: by 2002:ac0:8845:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id g63csp1021889img; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 12:41:56 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3Ia22ihDMhe5V+ssO/AxjVAbES2Vhmy/NeuMqVtF7mq61vbJbc2GePT6sisV1m5XicjhYbbz X-Received: by 2002:a62:5789:: with SMTP id i9mr27311315pfj.75.1551213716753; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 12:41:56 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1551213716; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=sk9atjmLP8FD+Ja+EQw+L6ohf97tdC8MyvX5s5JqIGSZ84Ai18cwRv8wAfV8I1v7eY q711jYbXHmSHYuyofakEBNj1uQw0ocQsJnN7u4fxDgwHctWl8I08gJwPPdc/RJ9RWY7r Rb3pPyp1VkzDaEHjbpOFkY+S/7pXY50v895ZkSGmiXNgwK7QlRRP6OAJ9q72TbcsVfT4 cVP2TtEIifVBuQcVl+tkhYNnGdeSMtoTaOmuDBbipXGSaLMRboqs2IswoBjSeWsuVrcW lkgeBxmXgBoVqbSWDWApPvt804lcSxJCWOP8hVx5g7gtpfqGz45pMd0BSJ5ciFtHuqKi wHnQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=JxMHd5xgLUnrCKWn4gqh4NtwqzA60WzC/XA13iSES64=; b=Im41UI5HRr3qTukRZ4nrQy3wFAD79FvHwIlK9BwpxsL93DwTIrcj0n5nranzQkBmqk Uq80PyogJtwpMGvrdlmQOtXI0AT0jwSccCqH5mLkzD0r78v4wQO1EeHvxX8kPwuj4dJh oJR4e3H1W1ysH/XfVbozKFNgNh7bXvknXKXX3ZiNs4foPsrS3U15fSTrOy8kTaRLBlaE B/DVynlrNriylFl7lt1pzwKe7PK6Vb3rKsmzcNO4tbpm8cwZdr0IeRuWIvlWA1YgVKe4 Uc3fHz5HP17okymwO6f4WiHKCXiZbTSQ/aI3wJs2SGUVw2qs7GvFX31/9YR95+LAdFQz TWtA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id gn14si11338638plb.171.2019.02.26.12.41.41; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 12:41:56 -0800 (PST) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729030AbfBZUkv (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 26 Feb 2019 15:40:51 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:45098 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727981AbfBZUkv (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Feb 2019 15:40:51 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1A2F5B6A5; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 20:40:50 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 21:40:47 +0100 From: Michal Hocko To: Qian Cai Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/hotplug: fix an imbalance with DEBUG_PAGEALLOC Message-ID: <20190226204047.GJ10588@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20190225191710.48131-1-cai@lca.pw> <20190226123521.GZ10588@dhcp22.suse.cz> <4d4d3140-6d83-6d22-efdb-370351023aea@lca.pw> <20190226142352.GC10588@dhcp22.suse.cz> <1551203585.6911.47.camel@lca.pw> <20190226181648.GG10588@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190226182007.GH10588@dhcp22.suse.cz> <1551208782.6911.51.camel@lca.pw> <20190226194024.GI10588@dhcp22.suse.cz> <1551211839.6911.54.camel@lca.pw> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1551211839.6911.54.camel@lca.pw> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 26-02-19 15:10:39, Qian Cai wrote: > On Tue, 2019-02-26 at 20:40 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > > It seems you have missed the point of my question. It simply doesn't > > make much sense to have offline memory mapped. That memory is not > > accessible in general. So mapping it at the offline time is dubious at > > best. > > Well, kernel_map_pages() is like other debug features which could look > "unusual". > > > Also you do not get through the offlining phase on a newly > > hotplugged (and not yet onlined) memory. So the patch doesn't look > > correct to me and it all smells like the bug you are seeing is a wrong > > reporting. > > > > That (physical memory hotadd) is a special case like during the boot. The patch > is strictly to deal with offline/online memory, i.e., logical/soft memory > hotplug. And it doesn't handle it properly AFAICS. You want to get an exception when accessing an offline memory, don't you? Offline, free or not present memory is basically the same case - nobody should be touching that memory. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs