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:   Fri, 17 Jan 2020 09:59:32 +0100
From:   Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc:     Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com, pmladek@suse.com,
        rostedt@goodmis.org, peterz@infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v4] mm/hotplug: silence a lockdep splat with
 printk()
Message-ID: <20200117085932.GK19428@dhcp22.suse.cz>
References: <20200117022111.18807-1-cai@lca.pw>
 <d7068679-e28a-98a9-f5b8-49ea47f7c092@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d7068679-e28a-98a9-f5b8-49ea47f7c092@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri 17-01-20 09:51:05, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 17.01.20 03:21, Qian Cai wrote:
[...]
> > Even though has_unmovable_pages doesn't hold any reference to the
> > returned page this should be reasonably safe for the purpose of
> > reporting the page (dump_page) because it cannot be hotremoved. The
> 
> This is only true in the context of memory unplug, but not in the
> context of is_mem_section_removable()-> is_pageblock_removable_nolock().

Well, the above should hold for that path as well AFAICS. If the page is
unmovable then a racing hotplug cannot remove it, right? Or do you
consider a temporary unmovability to be a problem?
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs