From: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>
To: Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com, Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu <yasu.isimatu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] memory-hotplug: remove reset_node_managed_pages() and reset_node_managed_pages() in hotadd_new_pgdat()
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:17:07 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55DAE113.20503@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55D9A036.7060506@cn.fujitsu.com>
On 2015/8/23 18:28, Tang Chen wrote:
> Hi Shi,
>
> Sorry for the late reply. I hope it won't be too late.
>
> NON-ACK by me, I think.
>
> I noticed that your first has been merged. But it won't fix the problem
> these code intended to fix.
>
> After your patch 1, zone's spanned/present won't be set to 0 because:
>
> free_area_init_node()
> |--> get_pfn_range_for_nid(&start_pfn, &end_pfn)
> |--> calculate_node_totalpages(pgdat, start_pfn, end_pfn, ...)
> | --> zone_spanned_pages_in_node()
> | --> if (!node_start_pfn && !node_end_pfn) return 0; -------- false, won't return 0
> | --> zone_absent_pages_in_node()
> | --> if (!node_start_pfn && !node_end_pfn) return 0; -------- false, won't return 0
>
Hi Tang,
Thank you for your reply. When we add a new node, it is not included in the
memblock, I have no idea why zone_spanned_pages_in_node() and zone_absent_pages_in_node()
won't return 0. Do you add some debug code and print it?
> This is caused by a little bug in your patch 1.
>
> You should put memblock_add_node(start, size, nid) before hotadd_new_pgdat()
> because:
>
My patch is just add an empty node first, later __add_zone() will update the size.
But it is all right put here, and it can fix the print bug.
> hotadd_new_pgdat()
> | --> free_area_init_node()
> | --> get_pfn_range_for_nid()
> | --> find memory ranges in memblock.
>
> | --> memblock_add_node(start, size, nid) ------------------- if you add it here, it doesn't work.
>
> The result will be like below if we hotadd node 5.
> [ 2007.577000] Initmem setup node 5 [mem 0x0000000000000000-0xffffffffffffffff]
pr_info("Initmem setup node %d [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n", nid,
(u64)start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT, ((u64)end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
start_pfn and end_pfn are both 0, and 0-1 -> 0xffffffffffffffff, right?
> [ 2007.584000] On node 5 totalpages: 0
> [ 2007.585000] Built 5 zonelists in Node order, mobility grouping on. Total pages: 32588823
> [ 2007.594000] Policy zone: Normal
> [ 2007.598000] init_memory_mapping: [mem 0x60000000000-0x607ffffffff]
>
>
> And also, if we merge this patch, /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/meminfo will break.
>
trigger call trace?
>
> Since this patch is not merged, I think let's just drop it.
>
> And about the little bug in your patch 1, since I'm in a hurry, I have already send a patch to fix it.
>
>
> Thanks. :)
>
>
> On 08/11/2015 03:33 PM, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>> After hotadd_new_pgdat()->free_area_init_node(), the pgdat and zone's spanned/present
>> are both 0, so remove reset_node_managed_pages() and reset_node_managed_pages().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> mm/memory_hotplug.c | 25 -------------------------
>> 1 file changed, 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>> index 11f26cc..997dfad 100644
>> --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>> +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>> @@ -1065,16 +1065,6 @@ int __ref online_pages(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages, int online_typ
>> }
>> #endif /* CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG_SPARSE */
>> -static void reset_node_present_pages(pg_data_t *pgdat)
>> -{
>> - struct zone *z;
>> -
>> - for (z = pgdat->node_zones; z < pgdat->node_zones + MAX_NR_ZONES; z++)
>> - z->present_pages = 0;
>> -
>> - pgdat->node_present_pages = 0;
>> -}
>> -
>> /* we are OK calling __meminit stuff here - we have CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG */
>> static pg_data_t __ref *hotadd_new_pgdat(int nid, u64 start)
>> {
>> @@ -1109,21 +1099,6 @@ static pg_data_t __ref *hotadd_new_pgdat(int nid, u64 start)
>> build_all_zonelists(pgdat, NULL);
>> mutex_unlock(&zonelists_mutex);
>> - /*
>> - * zone->managed_pages is set to an approximate value in
>> - * free_area_init_core(), which will cause
>> - * /sys/device/system/node/nodeX/meminfo has wrong data.
>> - * So reset it to 0 before any memory is onlined.
>> - */
>> - reset_node_managed_pages(pgdat);
>> -
>> - /*
>> - * When memory is hot-added, all the memory is in offline state. So
>> - * clear all zones' present_pages because they will be updated in
>> - * online_pages() and offline_pages().
>> - */
>> - reset_node_present_pages(pgdat);
>> -
>> return pgdat;
>> }
>>
>
>
> .
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>
To: Tang Chen <tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>,
Kamezawa Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com>,
<izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>, Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Yasuaki Ishimatsu <yasu.isimatu@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] memory-hotplug: remove reset_node_managed_pages() and reset_node_managed_pages() in hotadd_new_pgdat()
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 17:17:07 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55DAE113.20503@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <55D9A036.7060506@cn.fujitsu.com>
On 2015/8/23 18:28, Tang Chen wrote:
> Hi Shi,
>
> Sorry for the late reply. I hope it won't be too late.
>
> NON-ACK by me, I think.
>
> I noticed that your first has been merged. But it won't fix the problem
> these code intended to fix.
>
> After your patch 1, zone's spanned/present won't be set to 0 because:
>
> free_area_init_node()
> |--> get_pfn_range_for_nid(&start_pfn, &end_pfn)
> |--> calculate_node_totalpages(pgdat, start_pfn, end_pfn, ...)
> | --> zone_spanned_pages_in_node()
> | --> if (!node_start_pfn && !node_end_pfn) return 0; -------- false, won't return 0
> | --> zone_absent_pages_in_node()
> | --> if (!node_start_pfn && !node_end_pfn) return 0; -------- false, won't return 0
>
Hi Tang,
Thank you for your reply. When we add a new node, it is not included in the
memblock, I have no idea why zone_spanned_pages_in_node() and zone_absent_pages_in_node()
won't return 0. Do you add some debug code and print it?
> This is caused by a little bug in your patch 1.
>
> You should put memblock_add_node(start, size, nid) before hotadd_new_pgdat()
> because:
>
My patch is just add an empty node first, later __add_zone() will update the size.
But it is all right put here, and it can fix the print bug.
> hotadd_new_pgdat()
> | --> free_area_init_node()
> | --> get_pfn_range_for_nid()
> | --> find memory ranges in memblock.
>
> | --> memblock_add_node(start, size, nid) ------------------- if you add it here, it doesn't work.
>
> The result will be like below if we hotadd node 5.
> [ 2007.577000] Initmem setup node 5 [mem 0x0000000000000000-0xffffffffffffffff]
pr_info("Initmem setup node %d [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n", nid,
(u64)start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT, ((u64)end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
start_pfn and end_pfn are both 0, and 0-1 -> 0xffffffffffffffff, right?
> [ 2007.584000] On node 5 totalpages: 0
> [ 2007.585000] Built 5 zonelists in Node order, mobility grouping on. Total pages: 32588823
> [ 2007.594000] Policy zone: Normal
> [ 2007.598000] init_memory_mapping: [mem 0x60000000000-0x607ffffffff]
>
>
> And also, if we merge this patch, /sys/devices/system/node/nodeX/meminfo will break.
>
trigger call trace?
>
> Since this patch is not merged, I think let's just drop it.
>
> And about the little bug in your patch 1, since I'm in a hurry, I have already send a patch to fix it.
>
>
> Thanks. :)
>
>
> On 08/11/2015 03:33 PM, Xishi Qiu wrote:
>> After hotadd_new_pgdat()->free_area_init_node(), the pgdat and zone's spanned/present
>> are both 0, so remove reset_node_managed_pages() and reset_node_managed_pages().
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@huawei.com>
>> ---
>> mm/memory_hotplug.c | 25 -------------------------
>> 1 file changed, 25 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>> index 11f26cc..997dfad 100644
>> --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>> +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>> @@ -1065,16 +1065,6 @@ int __ref online_pages(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages, int online_typ
>> }
>> #endif /* CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG_SPARSE */
>> -static void reset_node_present_pages(pg_data_t *pgdat)
>> -{
>> - struct zone *z;
>> -
>> - for (z = pgdat->node_zones; z < pgdat->node_zones + MAX_NR_ZONES; z++)
>> - z->present_pages = 0;
>> -
>> - pgdat->node_present_pages = 0;
>> -}
>> -
>> /* we are OK calling __meminit stuff here - we have CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG */
>> static pg_data_t __ref *hotadd_new_pgdat(int nid, u64 start)
>> {
>> @@ -1109,21 +1099,6 @@ static pg_data_t __ref *hotadd_new_pgdat(int nid, u64 start)
>> build_all_zonelists(pgdat, NULL);
>> mutex_unlock(&zonelists_mutex);
>> - /*
>> - * zone->managed_pages is set to an approximate value in
>> - * free_area_init_core(), which will cause
>> - * /sys/device/system/node/nodeX/meminfo has wrong data.
>> - * So reset it to 0 before any memory is onlined.
>> - */
>> - reset_node_managed_pages(pgdat);
>> -
>> - /*
>> - * When memory is hot-added, all the memory is in offline state. So
>> - * clear all zones' present_pages because they will be updated in
>> - * online_pages() and offline_pages().
>> - */
>> - reset_node_present_pages(pgdat);
>> -
>> return pgdat;
>> }
>>
>
>
> .
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-08-24 9:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-08-11 7:26 [PATCH 1/2] memory-hotplug: fix wrong edge when hot add a new node Xishi Qiu
2015-08-11 7:26 ` Xishi Qiu
2015-08-11 7:33 ` [PATCH 2/2] memory-hotplug: remove reset_node_managed_pages() and reset_node_managed_pages() in hotadd_new_pgdat() Xishi Qiu
2015-08-11 7:33 ` Xishi Qiu
2015-08-23 10:28 ` Tang Chen
2015-08-23 10:28 ` Tang Chen
2015-08-24 9:17 ` Xishi Qiu [this message]
2015-08-24 9:17 ` Xishi Qiu
2015-08-24 9:39 ` Tang Chen
2015-08-24 9:39 ` Tang Chen
2015-08-24 11:24 ` Xishi Qiu
2015-08-24 11:24 ` Xishi Qiu
2015-08-26 7:19 ` Tang Chen
2015-08-26 7:19 ` Tang Chen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-04-17 7:14 Xishi Qiu
2015-04-17 7:14 ` Xishi Qiu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55DAE113.20503@huawei.com \
--to=qiuxishi@huawei.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=tangchen@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=yasu.isimatu@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.