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;
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.11\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] mm/hotplug: skip bad PFNs from pfn_to_online_page()
From:   Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
In-Reply-To: <CAPcyv4hyQsAhw35hc4S7hJ2Mh7qwu6ANuh9Bs174okWZZwujgg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 16 Jun 2019 22:25:24 -0400
Cc:     "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <642FC723-2FCB-415D-8EE0-AE013D5AAF10@lca.pw>
References: <1560366952-10660-1-git-send-email-cai@lca.pw>
 <CAPcyv4hn0Vz24s5EWKr39roXORtBTevZf7dDutH+jwapgV3oSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPcyv4iuNYXmF0-EMP8GF5aiPsWF+pOFMYKCnr509WoAQ0VNUA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1560376072.5154.6.camel@lca.pw> <87lfy4ilvj.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
 <1560524365.5154.21.camel@lca.pw>
 <CAPcyv4jAzMzFjSD22VU9Csw+kgGbf8r=XHbdJYzgL_uH_GVEvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPcyv4hjvBPDYKpp2Gns3-cc2AQ0AVS1nLk-K3fwXeRUvvzQLg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1560541220.5154.23.camel@lca.pw>
 <CAPcyv4i5iUop_H-Ai4q_hn2-3L6aRuovY44tuV50bp1oZj29TQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1560544982.5154.24.camel@lca.pw>
 <CAPcyv4hyQsAhw35hc4S7hJ2Mh7qwu6ANuh9Bs174okWZZwujgg@mail.gmail.com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


> On Jun 16, 2019, at 11:42 AM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> =
wrote:
>=20
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 1:43 PM Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> wrote:
>>=20
>> On Fri, 2019-06-14 at 12:48 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 12:40 PM Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> wrote:
>>>>=20
>>>> On Fri, 2019-06-14 at 11:57 -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 11:03 AM Dan Williams =
<dan.j.williams@intel.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 7:59 AM Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> wrote:
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> On Fri, 2019-06-14 at 14:28 +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
>>>>>>>> Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw> writes:
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> 1) offline is busted [1]. It looks like test_pages_in_a_zone()
>>>>>>>>> missed
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> same
>>>>>>>>> pfn_section_valid() check.
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>> 2) powerpc booting is generating endless warnings [2]. In
>>>>>>>>> vmemmap_populated() at
>>>>>>>>> arch/powerpc/mm/init_64.c, I tried to change PAGES_PER_SECTION =
to
>>>>>>>>> PAGES_PER_SUBSECTION, but it alone seems not enough.
>>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>>> Can you check with this change on ppc64.  I haven't reviewed =
this
>>>>>>>> series
>>>>>>>> yet.
>>>>>>>> I did limited testing with change . Before merging this I need =
to go
>>>>>>>> through the full series again. The vmemmap poplulate on ppc64 =
needs
>>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>>> handle two translation mode (hash and radix). With respect to =
vmemap
>>>>>>>> hash doesn't setup a translation in the linux page table. Hence =
we
>>>>>>>> need
>>>>>>>> to make sure we don't try to setup a mapping for a range which =
is
>>>>>>>> arleady convered by an existing mapping.
>>>>>>>=20
>>>>>>> It works fine.
>>>>>>=20
>>>>>> Strange... it would only change behavior if valid_section() is =
true
>>>>>> when pfn_valid() is not or vice versa. They "should" be identical
>>>>>> because subsection-size =3D=3D section-size on PowerPC, at least =
with the
>>>>>> current definition of SUBSECTION_SHIFT. I suspect maybe
>>>>>> free_area_init_nodes() is too late to call subsection_map_init() =
for
>>>>>> PowerPC.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> Can you give the attached incremental patch a try? This will break
>>>>> support for doing sub-section hot-add in a section that was only
>>>>> partially populated early at init, but that can be repaired later =
in
>>>>> the series. First things first, don't regress.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>>>> index 874eb22d22e4..520c83aa0fec 100644
>>>>> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
>>>>> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
>>>>> @@ -7286,12 +7286,10 @@ void __init free_area_init_nodes(unsigned =
long
>>>>> *max_zone_pfn)
>>>>>=20
>>>>>        /* Print out the early node map */
>>>>>        pr_info("Early memory node ranges\n");
>>>>> -       for_each_mem_pfn_range(i, MAX_NUMNODES, &start_pfn, =
&end_pfn,
>>>>> &nid) {
>>>>> +       for_each_mem_pfn_range(i, MAX_NUMNODES, &start_pfn, =
&end_pfn,
>>>>> &nid)
>>>>>                pr_info("  node %3d: [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n", nid,
>>>>>                        (u64)start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT,
>>>>>                        ((u64)end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
>>>>> -               subsection_map_init(start_pfn, end_pfn - =
start_pfn);
>>>>> -       }
>>>>>=20
>>>>>        /* Initialise every node */
>>>>>        mminit_verify_pageflags_layout();
>>>>> diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c
>>>>> index 0baa2e55cfdd..bca8e6fa72d2 100644
>>>>> --- a/mm/sparse.c
>>>>> +++ b/mm/sparse.c
>>>>> @@ -533,6 +533,7 @@ static void __init sparse_init_nid(int nid,
>>>>> unsigned long pnum_begin,
>>>>>                }
>>>>>                check_usemap_section_nr(nid, usage);
>>>>>                sparse_init_one_section(__nr_to_section(pnum), =
pnum,
>>>>> map, usage);
>>>>> +               subsection_map_init(section_nr_to_pfn(pnum),
>>>>> PAGES_PER_SECTION);
>>>>>                usage =3D (void *) usage + =
mem_section_usage_size();
>>>>>        }
>>>>>        sparse_buffer_fini();
>>>>=20
>>>> It works fine except it starts to trigger slab debugging errors =
during boot.
>>>> Not
>>>> sure if it is related yet.
>>>=20
>>> If you want you can give this branch a try if you suspect something
>>> else in -next is triggering the slab warning.
>>>=20
>>> =
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/djbw/nvdimm.git/log/?h=3Ds=
ubsect
>>> ion-v9
>>>=20
>>> It's the original v9 patchset + dependencies backported to v5.2-rc4.
>>>=20
>>> I otherwise don't see how subsections would effect slab caches.
>>=20
>> It works fine there.
>=20
> Much appreciated Qian!
>=20
> Does this change modulate the x86 failures?

Yes, it also fix the kmemleak_scan() and offline issues on x86.