All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
To: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
Cc: Aditya Gupta <adityag@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.ibm.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [REPORT] Softlockups on PowerNV with upstream
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 10:23:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z_d_8fyQzGuwzbIv@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dc4c0d4e-a9a5-4fa5-b39d-4248fba26043@redhat.com>

On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 03:35:19PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
> Thanks, Oscar. You're correct that the overhead is introduced by for_each_present_section_nr().
> I already had the fix, working on IBM's Power9 machine, where the issue can be
> reproduced. Please see the attached patch.
> 
> I'm having most tests on ARM64 machine for the fix.

Looks good to me.
But we need a comment explaining why block_id is set to ULONG_MAX
at the beginning as this might not be obvious.

Also, do we need
 if (block_id != ULONG_MAX && memory_block_id(nr) == block_id) ?

Cannot just be

 if (memory_block_id(nr) == block_id) ?

AFAICS, the first time we loop through 'memory_block_id(nr) == ULONG_MAX'
will evaluate false and and we will set block_id afterwards.

Either way looks fine to me.
Another way I guess would be:


-- 
Oscar Salvador
SUSE Labs


  reply	other threads:[~2025-04-10  8:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-04-09 18:03 [REPORT] Softlockups on PowerNV with upstream Aditya Gupta
2025-04-10  1:35 ` Gavin Shan
2025-04-10 11:38   ` Aditya Gupta
2025-04-10  5:25 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-04-10  5:35   ` Gavin Shan
2025-04-10  8:23     ` Oscar Salvador [this message]
2025-04-10  9:44       ` Gavin Shan
2025-04-10 11:49         ` Aditya Gupta
2025-04-10 12:22         ` Aditya Gupta
2025-04-10 12:32           ` Gavin Shan
2025-04-10 11:44   ` Aditya Gupta
2025-04-10 12:26     ` Aditya Gupta

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=Z_d_8fyQzGuwzbIv@localhost.localdomain \
    --to=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=adityag@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dakr@kernel.org \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=gshan@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=sourabhjain@linux.ibm.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.