Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:5bc5:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id os5csp4317491pxb; Tue, 2 Nov 2021 07:47:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwNbKN+I9mam4Z9ZNvGVn6rZ+VDHsN6AdpPAgXfgi29npGDArqxe2+MLAQlnd5ON+P6WseJ X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:3f19:: with SMTP id hq25mr12058875ejc.225.1635864458123; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 07:47:38 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1635864458; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=r5eQVmPrOMNGxjr2U0i3Esmlu+ceI9JKaS0IJC++9zTmPXhbPljuIZuPmXdzzHMsjr OzqZh2yX84A4jwwF3+M2EUmoDb97Y6KzzRuChXhM1c65aTp5i+BNMS+DYoo++0M9QOJg U7pROc+foDdi8SjxKWTZnl1pllqj+vIoOlf/bJDVS1+OVUL/PrsUl/N2XV90dnmb5/Ag gnNPkgbpxzo8oQbxuIThzVsLzo3kibO0loIxk6rxnbDj4fpUU7e4gwPjoOxr9RI03d1J X3xVbKs47ooyKJaUFBiHqXRmd/gJJwJtfSf1WDOF0O4EnfqtGwkbL/G1mf9jPh+r9oNx 4ZDw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :organization:from:references:cc:to:content-language:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:dkim-signature; bh=jic1F9UNvooEC2d+xw/+5aCM+bj4ORtETpFt0PPjtmo=; b=CtnJFSMrurlXp8/Xf6gIdFmLpoXWxs5w//f/7SpdsWXk2YBfwm0AKbgnWwW7p6FxTX MBXCWtMP6xomSt2QVTJXJ6Pk0ApFaLB+MOvqpuBV43o2ku39BeITLbzfwqGmlxL+Lv4i bYS9Tvl/jBoLmG8lYR+oF+Pobkqd7Wf+l303CaV5cO7VbQI7yN/xF3XAwXUXTrls5tYt Sj3c4tRT52rhlJ33Tjh1MbhCs8qEYuLW5cWFJ2qfw+/K6LmxBkQcqbBs3CU7j5O/K+Mz s2J7j4acD7izPcK2C6wmRdf81vUncn5fnvW0ujQuaCZWQH/6iymYAz5ZktFC4CHIkGGB lULQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=L4xhvObe; 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; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f29si16529078edc.273.2021.11.02.07.47.13; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 07:47:38 -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; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=L4xhvObe; 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; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230502AbhKBOrd (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 2 Nov 2021 10:47:33 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:58141 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230326AbhKBOrc (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Nov 2021 10:47:32 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1635864296; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=jic1F9UNvooEC2d+xw/+5aCM+bj4ORtETpFt0PPjtmo=; b=L4xhvObeDbLRlLIATzHYUkyX6GEygyPJcfSyL7+nlciRgPPhc3hjgWD5eVfk8SlQgNXWyZ 3GRNWIsjHVcTTS37bNQOKn4mxn9QOw7lQK61gIsTu3UknzzNlJii3FLyni4NjxXyXODcLS pS01OHn60p0JfAYArF40hYPV6cLgySg= Received: from mail-wr1-f70.google.com (mail-wr1-f70.google.com [209.85.221.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-593-DBtO7zm2O6iwaLSIe9-dew-1; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 10:44:55 -0400 X-MC-Unique: DBtO7zm2O6iwaLSIe9-dew-1 Received: by mail-wr1-f70.google.com with SMTP id y10-20020adffa4a000000b0017eea6cb05dso3648032wrr.6 for ; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 07:44:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:organization:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=jic1F9UNvooEC2d+xw/+5aCM+bj4ORtETpFt0PPjtmo=; b=aPKRQ+ZHJsfrmoroZ31eg7G0frbXUfLYyThYI7fqeQbQUBye9PTfcsyuKj1pl4fHwm SwOCFHrxJGjIt30sq1JUp8aA2E8slD9Q858MhV9YEkEr9Z0jBoYfe9ZoCd7BmmeSXLbz E4nDF+hs4iXVCqn0ezbOci0Cls3j5FIS8C1S+NCj/84QmlPoM+YT9sdovuO9I5Ao9G87 R4X0xK16dvbhbavq88gpezuqJEdp1FTE5p8WX4NfJOqD/HXqgrx1Np01FJXek4dJ+c7+ JqZgr5cTaK5T6ww8Zu+PVpZ2mUt9J5SzZjOGW3S8Ebjqc3MMnnyaM72m6V2JPWI7KW6U Z6Ag== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531WOr7KvCVCiMsdAQTCdgPu+kjl6hwRektadpzRsLPn/yrocqWb 1PZqM89Io5bIUkPFeupN/7kRizFKAA3Wq74ZBbQSuFKQiz/BO+p3ONwQM0d/NEA6xjs/xk17SmI dHKR45pxkM1NV4k8lphSYA4S1 X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:221a:: with SMTP id z26mr7823252wml.20.1635864294654; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 07:44:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:221a:: with SMTP id z26mr7823225wml.20.1635864294488; Tue, 02 Nov 2021 07:44:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.3.132] (p5b0c6810.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [91.12.104.16]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c11sm3176123wmq.27.2021.11.02.07.44.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 02 Nov 2021 07:44:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 15:44:52 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.2.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: fix panic in __alloc_pages Content-Language: en-US To: Michal Hocko Cc: Alexey Makhalov , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Andrew Morton , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "stable@vger.kernel.org" , Oscar Salvador References: <42abfba6-b27e-ca8b-8cdf-883a9398b506@redhat.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 02.11.21 15:12, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Tue 02-11-21 14:41:25, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> On 02.11.21 14:25, Michal Hocko wrote: > [...] >>> Btw. do you plan to send a patch for pcp allocator to use cpu_to_mem? >> >> You mean s/cpu_to_node/cpu_to_mem/ or also handling offline nids? > > just cpu_to_mem > >> cpu_to_mem() corresponds to cpu_to_node() unless on ia64+ppc IIUC, so it >> won't help for this very report. > > Weird, x86 allows memory less nodes as well. But you are right > there is nothing selecting HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES neither do I see any > arch specific implementation. I have to say that I have forgot all those > nasty details... Sigh > I assume HAVE_MEMORYLESS_NODES is just an optimization to set a preferred memory node for memoryless nodes. It doesn't imply that we cannot have memoryless nodes otherwise. I suspect just as so often, the config option name doesn't express what it really does. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb