Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 08:58:10 +0900
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
       Lee Schermerhorn <lee.schermerhorn@hp.com>,
       KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>, miaox@cn.fujitsu.com,
       Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
       Christoph Lameter <cl@linux-foundation.org>,
       Paul Menage <menage@google.com>, Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
       y-goto@jp.fujitsu.com, Pekka Enberg <penberg@cs.helsinki.fi>,
       linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] set_mempolicy(MPOL_INTERLEAV) cause kernel panic
Message-Id: <20090728085810.f7ae678a.kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0907271047590.8408@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
References: <20090715182320.39B5.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
	<1247679064.4089.26.camel@useless.americas.hpqcorp.net>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.0907161257190.31844@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.0907241551070.8573@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
	<20090724160936.a3b8ad29.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<337c5d83954b38b14a17f0adf4d357d8.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com>
	<5bb65c0e4c6828b1331d33745f34d9ee.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com>
	<9443f91bd4648e6214b32acff4512b97.squirrel@webmail-b.css.fujitsu.com>
	<alpine.DEB.2.00.0907271047590.8408@chino.kir.corp.google.com>
Organization: FUJITSU Co. LTD.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1680
Lines: 52

On Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:55:47 -0700 (PDT)
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com> wrote:

> On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> 
> > _Direct_ use of task->mems_allowed is only in cpuset and mempolicy.
> > If no policy is used, it's not checked.
> > (See alloc_pages_current())
> > 
> > memory hotplug's notifier just updates top_cpuset's mems_allowed.
> > But it doesn't update each task's ones.
> 
> That's not true, cpuset_track_online_nodes() will call 
> scan_for_empty_cpusets() on top_cpuset, which works from the root to 
> leaves updating each cpuset's mems_allowed by intersecting it with 
> node_states[N_HIGH_MEMORY].  This is done as part of the MEM_OFFLINE 
> callback in the cpuset code, so N_HIGH_MEMORY represents the nodes still 
> online.
> 
yes.

> The nodemask for each task is updated to reflect the removal of a node and 
> it calls mpol_rebind_mm() with the new nodemask.
> 
yes, but _not_ updated at online.

> This is admittedly pretty late to be removing mems from cpusets (and 
> mempolicies) when the unplug has already happened.  We should look at 
> doing the rebind for MEM_GOING_OFFLINE.
> 
Hm.

What I felt at reading cpuset/mempolicy again is that it's too complex ;)
The 1st question is why mems_allowed which can be 1024bytes when max_node=4096
is copied per tasks....
And mempolicy code uses too much nodemask_t on stack.

I'll try some, today, including this bug-fix.

Thanks,
-Kame


--
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/