From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
To: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
adityag@linux.ibm.com, donettom@linux.ibm.com, david@redhat.com,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, rafael@kernel.org, dakr@kernel.org,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, shan.gavin@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/base/memory: Avoid overhead from for_each_present_section_nr()
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 15:08:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z_fC0M94iwDcoOla@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250410125110.1232329-1-gshan@redhat.com>
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 10:51:10PM +1000, Gavin Shan wrote:
> for_each_present_section_nr() was introduced to add_boot_memory_block()
> by commit 61659efdb35c ("drivers/base/memory: improve add_boot_memory_block()").
> It causes unnecessary overhead when the present sections are really
> sparse. next_present_section_nr() called by the macro to find the next
> present section, which is far away from the spanning sections in the
> specified block. Too much time consumed by next_present_section_nr()
> in this case, which can lead to softlockup as observed by Aditya Gupta
> on IBM Power10 machine.
>
> watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#248 stuck for 22s! [swapper/248:1]
> Modules linked in:
> CPU: 248 UID: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/248 Not tainted 6.15.0-rc1-next-20250408 #1 VOLUNTARY
> Hardware name: 9105-22A POWER10 (raw) 0x800200 opal:v7.1-107-gfda75d121942 PowerNV
> NIP: c00000000209218c LR: c000000002092204 CTR: 0000000000000000
> REGS: c00040000418fa30 TRAP: 0900 Not tainted (6.15.0-rc1-next-20250408)
> MSR: 9000000002009033 <SF,HV,VEC,EE,ME,IR,DR,RI,LE> CR: 28000428 XER: 00000000
> CFAR: 0000000000000000 IRQMASK: 0
> GPR00: c000000002092204 c00040000418fcd0 c000000001b08100 0000000000000040
> GPR04: 0000000000013e00 c000c03ffebabb00 0000000000c03fff c000400fff587f80
> GPR08: 0000000000000000 00000000001196f7 0000000000000000 0000000028000428
> GPR12: 0000000000000000 c000000002e80000 c00000000001007c 0000000000000000
> GPR16: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> GPR20: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> GPR24: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0000000000000000
> GPR28: c000000002df7f70 0000000000013dc0 c0000000011dd898 0000000008000000
> NIP [c00000000209218c] memory_dev_init+0x114/0x1e0
> LR [c000000002092204] memory_dev_init+0x18c/0x1e0
> Call Trace:
> [c00040000418fcd0] [c000000002092204] memory_dev_init+0x18c/0x1e0 (unreliable)
> [c00040000418fd50] [c000000002091348] driver_init+0x78/0xa4
> [c00040000418fd70] [c0000000020063ac] kernel_init_freeable+0x22c/0x370
> [c00040000418fde0] [c0000000000100a8] kernel_init+0x34/0x25c
> [c00040000418fe50] [c00000000000cd94] ret_from_kernel_user_thread+0x14/0x1c
>
> Avoid the overhead by folding for_each_present_section_nr() to the outer
> loop. add_boot_memory_block() is dropped after that.
>
> Fixes: 61659efdb35c ("drivers/base/memory: improve add_boot_memory_block()")
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20250409180344.477916-1-adityag@linux.ibm.com
> Reported-by: Aditya Gupta <adityag@linux.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
--
Oscar Salvador
SUSE Labs
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-10 13:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-10 12:51 [PATCH] drivers/base/memory: Avoid overhead from for_each_present_section_nr() Gavin Shan
2025-04-10 13:08 ` Oscar Salvador [this message]
2025-04-10 13:18 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-10 13:55 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-04-10 14:12 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-04-10 14:25 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-11 5:04 ` Gavin Shan
2025-04-11 8:15 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-11 8:29 ` Oscar Salvador
2025-04-10 14:24 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-04-10 15:45 ` 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_fC0M94iwDcoOla@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=donettom@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=shan.gavin@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.