Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762789AbXJLRUo (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 13:20:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762258AbXJLRTe (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 13:19:34 -0400 Received: from netops-testserver-4-out.sgi.com ([192.48.171.29]:46463 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762714AbXJLRTc (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 13:19:32 -0400 Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:19:30 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: clameter@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com To: Yasunori Goto cc: Andrew Morton , Hiroyuki KAMEZAWA , Linux Kernel ML , linux-mm Subject: Re: [Patch 002/002] Create/delete kmem_cache_node for SLUB on memory online callback In-Reply-To: <20071012133336.B9A5.Y-GOTO@jp.fujitsu.com> Message-ID: References: <20071012112801.B9A1.Y-GOTO@jp.fujitsu.com> <20071012133336.B9A5.Y-GOTO@jp.fujitsu.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3572 Lines: 101 On Fri, 12 Oct 2007, Yasunori Goto wrote: > > > + down_read(&slub_lock); > > > + list_for_each_entry(s, &slab_caches, list) { > > > + local_node = page_to_nid(virt_to_page(s)); > > > + if (local_node == offline_node) > > > + /* This slub is on the offline node. */ > > > + return -EBUSY; > > > + } > > > + up_read(&slub_lock); > > > > So this checks if the any kmem_cache structure is on the offlined node? If > > so then we cannot offline the node? > > Right. If slabs' migration is possible, here would be good place for > doing it. But, it is not possible (at least now). I think you can avoid this check. The kmem_cache structures are allocated from the kmalloc array. The check if the kmalloc slabs are empty will fail if kmem_cache structures still exist on the node. > > > + * because the node is used by slub yet. > > > + */ > > > > It may be clearer to say: > > > > "If nr_slabs > 0 then slabs still exist on the node that is going down. > > We were unable to free them so we must fail." > > Again. If nr_slabs > 0, offline_pages must be fail due to slabs > remaining on the node before. So, this callback isn't called. Ok then we can remove these checks? > > > +static int slab_mem_going_online_callback(void *arg) > > > +{ > > > + struct kmem_cache_node *n; > > > + struct kmem_cache *s; > > > + struct memory_notify *marg = arg; > > > + int nid = marg->status_change_nid; > > > + > > > + /* If the node already has memory, then nothing is necessary. */ > > > + if (nid < 0) > > > + return 0; > > > > The node must have memory???? Or we have already brought up the code? > > kmem_cache_node is created at boot time if the node has memory. > (Or, it is created by this callback on first added memory on the node). > > When nid = - 1, kmem_cache_node is created before this node due to > node has memory. So the function can be called for a node that is already online? > > > + * New memory will be onlined on the node which has no memory so far. > > > + * New kmem_cache_node is necssary for it. > > > > "We are bringing a node online. No memory is available yet. We must > > allocate a kmem_cache_node structure in order to bring the node online." ? > > Your mention might be ok. > But. I would like to prefer to define status of node hotplug for > exactitude like followings > > > A)Node online -- pgdat is created and can be accessed for this node. > but there are no gurantee that cpu or memory is onlined. > This status is very close from memory-less node. > But this might be halfway status for node hotplug. > Node online bit is set. But N_HIGH_MEMORY > (or N_NORMAL_MEMORY) might be not set. Ahh.. Okay. > B)Node has memory-- > one or more sections memory is onlined on the node. > N_HIGH_MEMORY (or N_NORMAL_MEMORY) is set. > > If first memory is onlined on the node, the node status changes > from A) to B). > > I feel this is very useful to manage "halfway status" of node > hotplug. (So, memory-less node patch is very helpful for me.) > > So, I would like to avoid using the word "node online" at here. > But, if above definition is messy for others, I'll change it. Ok can we talk about this as node online and node memory available? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/