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;
To:     Georgi Djakov <quic_c_gdjako@quicinc.com>,
        Chris Goldsworthy <quic_cgoldswo@quicinc.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Sudarshan Rajagopalan <quic_sudaraja@quicinc.com>
References: <cover.1632437225.git.quic_cgoldswo@quicinc.com>
 <595d09279824faf1f54961cef52b745609b05d97.1632437225.git.quic_cgoldswo@quicinc.com>
 <4f4f6e93-ddc2-c9bb-ef47-4a40f2c3d0d7@quicinc.com>
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat
Subject: Re: [RFC] arm64: mm: update max_pfn after memory hotplug
Message-ID: <1b9c4377-0a6b-b7d4-7a6b-a69f9469bb70@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Sep 2021 19:34:02 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4f4f6e93-ddc2-c9bb-ef47-4a40f2c3d0d7@quicinc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 27.09.21 19:22, Georgi Djakov wrote:
> On 9/24/2021 1:54 AM, Chris Goldsworthy wrote:
>> From: Sudarshan Rajagopalan <quic_sudaraja@quicinc.com>
>>
>> After new memory blocks have been hotplugged, max_pfn and max_low_pfn
>> needs updating to reflect on new PFNs being hot added to system.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Sudarshan Rajagopalan <quic_sudaraja@quicinc.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Chris Goldsworthy <quic_cgoldswo@quicinc.com>
> 
> Thanks for the patch, Chris!
> 
> With this patch, the data in /proc/kpageflags appears to be correct and
> memory tools like procrank work again on arm64 platforms.
> 
> Tested-by: Georgi Djakov <quic_c_gdjako@quicinc.com>
> 
> Maybe we should add fixes tag, as it has been broken since the following
> commit:
> Fixes: abec749facff ("fs/proc/page.c: allow inspection of last section
> and fix end detection")

Are you sure that that commit broke it?

I recall that we would naturally run into the limit, because

count = min_t(size_t, count, (max_pfn * KPMSIZE) - src);

wouldn't really do what you would expect either. But you could 
force-read beyond max_pfn, yes, because the count computation was just 
weird.


I think the real issue is not properly adjusting max_pfn in the first 
place when we introduced memoruy hotplug on arm64.

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb