Received: by 2002:a05:6902:102b:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id x11csp1007224ybt; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 18:04:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwq8MU5CnnC35vPVBWCbP2hp7u6NYY/i9t/OMEuj07PBywb+NzvGOQItraV6ipITAfZtZnw X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:ef2:: with SMTP id x18mr52587605eji.547.1594256656171; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 18:04:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1594256656; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=FRycx4FbucSgtA4F5pzcH4x2TKyvr9FhX/T/vWeclWLozX52c/e0HzVo8GYE+aVp1Q SwiP+niLa0Ph4c9YgZb+6S2Fiea5VMImXFcDt6xOHjE3MANMSvRd2cf8q0DZRdVVQFTR iDWUyrYfmso8UEhUW+TCa0oZJrWR7vGZbTLxr4CF7zh7lyFH2t97iy7Vp9Xpad2MhMnZ ynd2gS18pjQ4Q9A3Ja+j9UHDA73Vc30EXHAycnhWhFMwEjwyfF9m/QuoT3XZvrc56JaF jfz2cnEWKKD1RD1mMHpZK7e6ztjJQ4LrYNhUyrsDOGsUrdY1+eGdQ3u+IpH4H109yC3R tkLA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references:cc:to :subject; bh=ZdJvtUmpbhmk5RCDJt9PYFfd4ckFPDhrYJzvo5l0/gY=; b=i6XPdJFWxfwqfL8s8K80pFDssz8Tmh9vNb0XRULUrubwSfpcG/imuOIZC5+6tZPw4y EiBreV7evFoOb+UynHUBp2SEYayOHFdH79WdlA2ssw25FpxC/wAKtteYZJkkiupWbL0j CMDhJ/NHx2v2aWhp6GZ2+vwWwmw16JMIYw+ZcigGb8QGckugToypqD8krKFVfDBBlWpc 0HVibHyCKtGdg9gf7eR2ZY+dtGV1bKhzr8y/+S8IMoA3ZNoBsdzgcpZ5qIpGjmZ741Wo WXo2/XLzXSj6soIYxE6/JKikzm3yAmAb1hlFFwTMzctEYyubDcGJFInlX9onN2LCCxiT VJjQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id t24si1014003eds.158.2020.07.08.18.03.53; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 18:04:16 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726107AbgGIBDY (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 8 Jul 2020 21:03:24 -0400 Received: from szxga04-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.190]:7822 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725978AbgGIBDY (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Jul 2020 21:03:24 -0400 Received: from DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.30.72.58]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id E7F3E4836568A6F36098; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 09:03:21 +0800 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.57.60.129) by DGGEMS402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.202) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.487.0; Thu, 9 Jul 2020 09:03:14 +0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH] vmalloc: Removing incorrect logs when vmalloc failed To: Uladzislau Rezki , Andrew Morton CC: Anshuman Khandual , Tian Tao , , , References: <1594113232-32193-1-git-send-email-tiantao6@hisilicon.com> <5e7885ef-081e-0682-7be7-40eb7712d2c7@arm.com> <20200707132442.GA26493@pc636> <3cf13a05-a6b8-aa2f-752d-f9a25a1005f9@huawei.com> <20200708134804.GA32309@pc636> From: "tiantao (H)" Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 09:03:13 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200708134804.GA32309@pc636> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: [10.57.60.129] X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ?? 2020/7/8 21:48, Uladzislau Rezki ะด??: >>>> On 07/07/2020 02:43 PM, Tian Tao wrote: >>>>> It is not possible to increase size with vmalloc= in arm64 >>>>> architecture and it will mislead.however vmalloc return failure >>>>> is a rare occurrence in 'many architectures including arm64'. >>>> >>>> But there is a chance that vmalloc() might work on architectures >>>> that support 'vmalloc=' command line i.e after a change and this >>>> information here might be helpful in those cases. >>>> >>> Agree. At least i see a few users of it: >>> >>> >>> urezki@pc638:~/data/coding/linux-next.git$ grep -rn early_param ./arch/ | grep vmalloc >>> ./arch/arm/mm/mmu.c:1152:early_param("vmalloc", early_vmalloc); >>> ./arch/unicore32/mm/mmu.c:276:early_param("vmalloc", early_vmalloc); >>> ./arch/x86/mm/pgtable_32.c:86:early_param("vmalloc", parse_vmalloc); >>> urezki@pc638:~/data/coding/linux-next.git$ >>> >>> >> I'm actually having this problem with the arm64 architecture at centos 7.6 >> and pagesize is 64K. >> I followed the prompts and added vmalloc= to the command to increase >> the size of the vmalloc.and found out it's not worked. >> It took me some time to find out that this doesn't work for the arm64 >> architecture, so this log is misleading on arm64. >> > Agree, it can take time to understand some code or logic behind of it. > So in that case having good documentation or comments always help. > >> I think it's better not to be prompted than to be prompted incorrectly. >> I'm sure there will be others with similar problems. >> So I'd like to solve this problem this time, Please help me with your >> suggestions. >> If I change the PATCH to the following, will you accept it? >> > Actually it is not up to me to decide what to take or not. Andrew Morton > is the key person here :) I can just review or make some comments same > as others. > >> if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN) && printk_ratelimit()) >> +#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64 && CONFIG_XXX >> + pr_warn("vmap allocation for size %lu failed\n", size); >> +#else >> pr_warn("vmap allocation for size %lu failed: use vmalloc= >> to increase size\n", >> size); >> +#endif >> > I do not have a strong opinion here, but counting arches seems odd. > Maybe modify the string with following message: > > > diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c > index 1f46c3b86f9f..0aa26bc128d7 100644 > --- a/mm/vmalloc.c > +++ b/mm/vmalloc.c > @@ -1202,7 +1202,7 @@ static struct vmap_area *alloc_vmap_area(unsigned long size, > } > > if (!(gfp_mask & __GFP_NOWARN) && printk_ratelimit()) > - pr_warn("vmap allocation for size %lu failed: use vmalloc= to increase size\n", > + pr_warn("vmap allocation for size %lu failed: use vmalloc= to increase size, if your ARCH supports it\n", > size); > > kmem_cache_free(vmap_area_cachep, va); > > Thanks, that's a good suggestion, I'll send v2 as you suggested! > -- > Vlad Rezki > > . >