Received: by 2002:a25:1506:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp133851ybv; Thu, 6 Feb 2020 19:38:24 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxzWSPbwtCzdAKribvlrTyoyhNYtuVpReUF0gdKveF8oG/wadwUpK612XW676EW2cPGTs82 X-Received: by 2002:aca:1a10:: with SMTP id a16mr754178oia.9.1581046704021; Thu, 06 Feb 2020 19:38:24 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1581046704; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=kh+se4368x+cyKQTYkmig6TseLmtUw5JefNydRWu6WgbUsipYySOBU7keZ7doSxa4v AXJFE6Ro0ZyOa01F+gAA+iqGBUFkazrknsi2WM4XYjyjrUzDXqRCCJDJSu2Tkf25Hlk0 vFVEfNSv9UyrO75SoApAs7KDkhd1AtJb09Q80EsdLTrF1Ruy+hyM5M5nlAFQifWE3w6C ikSPzuz5rRjBBq+vA9w0nipCgGDcILYXLtjVTfVR1FVat0QLjtS7sgT4sEAiSaSQ71Mf 1WhSVKtpIH09KCG5mqURXjqWgI7ZcXN1G36gWA92qsWpGb7z3NP1pv5OA5mdRh9yh6Ma dKxw== 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:dkim-signature; bh=kNfsZMrXvLDDzVoLhL2jmupSGehSTD9Rv6cnjwYywf4=; b=oLC/sdzT8yCEt7224p/DqIzkZhR4tt3AI3sqqJt5VbIQQK0ZBvLrPDPK672ae/0kSf NiJbx3sbqDXSziOkSRafRzNJSQYarXEYejnwA9NzUgEWjTxFNWaX96751n62wch6On/k BJO1PSfej+V1FC22AxxCiWz2BpVNoOL3RSYJwj89HhMlcJld6HEGmC1ic6JeqG63Qv38 Ye/gYmRUI+fpjysO+fKDgYTUSZ6OVw3SS0I+8xrbUoayduAipoVn5s0i/oj/mhn3n1+0 VC/WiwEuhTJQbxa+d8LjhbjbZPsC6MhmN3s6JvdRm0R/mx4qDx0JlaC9vc8DhpiyIQOV dH4g== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=e2lTPZov; 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=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id a22si3198479oia.15.2020.02.06.19.38.11; Thu, 06 Feb 2020 19:38:24 -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; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=e2lTPZov; 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=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727468AbgBGDgt (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 6 Feb 2020 22:36:49 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:43067 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726674AbgBGDgt (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Feb 2020 22:36:49 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1581046608; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=kNfsZMrXvLDDzVoLhL2jmupSGehSTD9Rv6cnjwYywf4=; b=e2lTPZov5X9cx3mNVtEcy0XW4TdNuhcf5z/6/MlcDodEDU66xlqoNnpaKmpK4aQ/JR//Wd Ohpuq2Q5qO3mnsyd08R+4s7+gYCTES3l40Pk/qU0Ci+aCgQ9NHHsMyHnk+a26hM36V5CPU qeYotsiwiEn11WipYwJv+FwRAod1H8E= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-60-6F2C0xAQMZucxI96X8Y58Q-1; Thu, 06 Feb 2020 22:36:44 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 6F2C0xAQMZucxI96X8Y58Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA9A01088382; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 03:36:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-12-30.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.12.30]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96643384; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 03:36:39 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2020 11:36:36 +0800 From: Baoquan He To: Dan Williams Cc: Wei Yang , Andrew Morton , Oscar Salvador , Linux MM , Linux Kernel Mailing List , David Hildenbrand Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm/sparsemem: get physical address to page struct instead of virtual address to pfn Message-ID: <20200207033636.GS8965@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> References: <20200206231629.14151-1-richardw.yang@linux.intel.com> <20200206231629.14151-3-richardw.yang@linux.intel.com> <20200207031011.GR8965@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> 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) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02/06/20 at 07:21pm, Dan Williams wrote: > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 7:10 PM Baoquan He wrote: > > > > Hi Dan, > > > > On 02/06/20 at 06:19pm, Dan Williams wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 3:17 PM Wei Yang wrote: > > > > diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c > > > > index b5da121bdd6e..56816f653588 100644 > > > > --- a/mm/sparse.c > > > > +++ b/mm/sparse.c > > > > @@ -888,7 +888,7 @@ int __meminit sparse_add_section(int nid, unsigned long start_pfn, > > > > /* Align memmap to section boundary in the subsection case */ > > > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP) && > > > > section_nr_to_pfn(section_nr) != start_pfn) > > > > - memmap = pfn_to_kaddr(section_nr_to_pfn(section_nr)); > > > > + memmap = pfn_to_page(section_nr_to_pfn(section_nr)); > > > > > > Yes, this looks obviously correct. This might be tripping up > > > makedumpfile. Do you see any practical effects of this bug? The kernel > > > mostly avoids ->section_mem_map in the vmemmap case and in the > > > !vmemmap case section_nr_to_pfn(section_nr) should always equal > > > start_pfn. > > > > The practical effects is that the memmap for the first unaligned section will be lost > > when destroy namespace to hot remove it. Because we encode the ->section_mem_map > > into mem_section, and get memmap from the related mem_section to free it in > > section_deactivate(). In fact in vmemmap, we don't need to encode the ->section_mem_map > > with memmap. > > Right, but can you actually trigger that in the SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP=n case? I think no, the lost memmap should only happen in vmemmap case. > > > By the way, sub-section support is only valid in vmemmap case, right? > > Yes. > > > Seems yes from code, but I don't find any document to prove it. > > check_pfn_span() enforces this requirement. Thanks for your confirmation. Do you mind if I add some document sentences somewhere make clear this?