Received: by 2002:a25:4158:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id o85csp4007654yba; Tue, 7 May 2019 10:32:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyfVN6hiyg4avU+tlLKzpr+0wlx0tgdVkhZMLlf3DVxG+8oozujSe5Jac67p5l+P8nWuvYU X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e287:: with SMTP id cf7mr41551331plb.217.1557250357952; Tue, 07 May 2019 10:32:37 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1557250357; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=AM6LXk8BE06oYGzz5RrddgvSLaGWwaNocvoDoL+dxpo485qaFFCPiPtqlCu1N4rrep Y9IanAf59hI5BzksPLIMrJNyDTACOtGrUiezueSKQ82OSyZhtA4jPZiBY/IzS7JVHUX5 IkLVjkF1pXcJCtfepsgOm9SrL7Nt7+nGYe1fFSotuKNYxLMbQf61LyJskFlE/PUqQql2 OmrWDOIXNE6GKeRuM3NKf1852jXbg0k9R8doZbAc62WcE7yfWVUyJecM6Q1BrDdo2LRp guMP6EiMEA7DO0govMidNGqyq+Z4fZcJ+1eYARhZ0RMAxvnVEK5ub3oJAHuT2MjY94dw xidA== 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=rBvz/W+UyoMQ2uBOXQc9tEHQ9nTfTe0J1trwJ7QOcRc=; b=aOyML7+CkQX290UqLpyUgh3DOfcGfkC1JwzKQUc7eIpqpGBUkk37Ku/NIYhDBOQDqZ BFpdjd+uYEC/BfLjPpofffRGZaloPp2xdMCP5+EKXoM+zqrdNp6Hy0yIPvttRZkOmpdX Ne50Fec81IAaUaeIDPZy7K39r0hJuo35uRCQlN/NSVrKc7cMMyCGGW1IeDwO1eeaztcK CTBuej7OPVOKK+jOwthGN64EjfGb5VzkcEWvLbor1rVvdbkf94UzZCMqirgLVKpR7jdf ltIaWHutdwN4YoVSZGnCNMdPW7gQcoLB9OCXTbDy6r8PXMQcr+x8OQpIb0wfybpvdC4G DsQQ== 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 q4si19673007plr.376.2019.05.07.10.32.21; Tue, 07 May 2019 10:32:37 -0700 (PDT) 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 S1727230AbfEGRb0 (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 7 May 2019 13:31:26 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:55856 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726256AbfEGRbZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 May 2019 13:31:25 -0400 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 6F20FAEA3; Tue, 7 May 2019 17:31:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 7 May 2019 19:31:21 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Sasha Levin , Alexander Duyck , LKML , stable , Mikhail Zaslonko , Gerald Schaefer , Mikhail Gavrilov , Dave Hansen , Alexander Duyck , Pasha Tatashin , Martin Schwidefsky , Heiko Carstens , Andrew Morton , Sasha Levin , linux-mm Subject: Re: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.14 62/95] mm, memory_hotplug: initialize struct pages for the full memory section Message-ID: <20190507173121.GR31017@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20190507053826.31622-1-sashal@kernel.org> <20190507053826.31622-62-sashal@kernel.org> <20190507170208.GF1747@sasha-vm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 07-05-19 10:15:19, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, May 7, 2019 at 10:02 AM Sasha Levin wrote: > > > > I got it wrong then. I'll fix it up and get efad4e475c31 in instead. This patch is not marked for stable backports for good reasons. > > Careful. That one had a bug too, and we have 891cb2a72d82 ("mm, > memory_hotplug: fix off-by-one in is_pageblock_removable"). > > All of these were *horribly* and subtly buggy, and might be > intertwined with other issues. And only trigger on a few specific > machines where the memory map layout is just right to trigger some > special case or other, and you have just the right config. Yes, the code turned out to be much more tricky than we thought. There were several assumptions about alignment etc. Something that is really hard to test for because HW breaking those assumptions is rare. So I would discourage picking up some random patches in the memory hotplug for stable. Each patch needs a very careful consideration. In any case we really try hard to keep Fixes: tag accurate so at least those should be scanned. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs