From: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
To: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hartleys@visionengravers.com,
mcrapet@gmail.com, linux@arm.linux.org.uk,
fred99@carolina.rr.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Double check memmap is actually valid with a memmap has unexpected holes
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 15:31:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090506143059.GB20709@csn.ul.ie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090505110653.GA16649@cmpxchg.org>
On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 01:06:53PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
> Hi Mel,
>
> On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 09:29:44AM +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> > pfn_valid() is meant to be able to tell if a given PFN has valid memmap
> > associated with it or not. In FLATMEM, it is expected that holes always
> > have valid memmap as long as there is valid PFNs either side of the hole.
> > In SPARSEMEM, it is assumed that a valid section has a memmap for the
> > entire section.
> >
> > However, ARM and maybe other embedded architectures in the future free
> > memmap backing holes to save memory on the assumption the memmap is never
> > used. The page_zone() linkages are then broken even though pfn_valid()
> > returns true. A walker of the full memmap in this case must do additional
> > check to ensure the memmap they are looking at is sane by making sure the
> > zone and PFN linkages are still valid. This is expensive, but walkers of
> > the full memmap are extremely rare.
> >
> > This was caught before for FLATMEM and hacked around but it hits again
> > for SPARSEMEM because the page_zone() linkages can look ok where the PFN
> > linkages are totally screwed. This looks like a hatchet job but the reality
> > is that any clean solution would end up consuming all the memory saved
> > by punching these unexpected holes in the memmap. For example, we tried
> > marking the memmap within the section invalid but the section size exceeds
> > the size of the hole in most cases so pfn_valid() starts returning false
> > where valid memmap exists. Shrinking the size of the section would increase
> > memory consumption offsetting the gains.
> >
> > This patch identifies when an architecture is punching unexpected holes
> > in the memmap that the memory model cannot automatically detect. When set,
> > walkers of the full memmap must call memmap_valid_within() for each PFN and
> > passing in what it expects the page and zone to be for that PFN. If it finds
> > the linkages to be broken, it assumes the memmap is invalid for that PFN.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mel@csn.ul.ie>
>
> I think we also need to fix up show_mem().
As it turns out, ARM has its own show_mem(). I don't see how, but ARM
must not be using lib/show_mem.c even though it compiles it.
> Attached is a
> compile-tested patch, please have a look. I am not sure about memory
> hotplug issues but on a quick glance the vmstat stuff seems to be
> optimistic as well.
>
> ---
> From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> Subject: lib: adjust show_mem() to support memmap holes
>
> Some architectures free the backing of mem_map holes. pfn_valid() is
> not able to report this properly, so a stronger check is needed if the
> caller is about to use the page descriptor derived from a pfn.
>
> Change the node walking to zone walking and use memmap_valid_within()
> to check for holes. This is reliable as it additionally checks for
> page_zone() and page_to_pfn() coherency.
>
> Not-yet-signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
> ---
> lib/show_mem.c | 21 +++++++++------------
> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lib/show_mem.c b/lib/show_mem.c
> index 238e72a..ed3c3ec 100644
> --- a/lib/show_mem.c
> +++ b/lib/show_mem.c
> @@ -11,29 +11,27 @@
>
> void show_mem(void)
> {
> - pg_data_t *pgdat;
> unsigned long total = 0, reserved = 0, shared = 0,
> nonshared = 0, highmem = 0;
> + struct zone *zone;
>
> printk(KERN_INFO "Mem-Info:\n");
> show_free_areas();
>
> - for_each_online_pgdat(pgdat) {
> - unsigned long i, flags;
> + for_each_populated_zone(zone) {
> + unsigned long start = zone->zone_start_pfn;
> + unsigned long end = start + zone->spanned_pages;
The patch appears to be doing two things
o Scanning zones instead of pgdats
o Adding the use of memmap_valid_within()
Scanning zones instead of pgdats seems like a good idea on its own and should
be split out for separate consideration.
> + unsigned long pfn;
>
> - pgdat_resize_lock(pgdat, &flags);
How sure are you about removing the acquisition of this lock? If anything,
it appears that pagetypeinfo_showblockcount_print() should be taking this lock.
> - for (i = 0; i < pgdat->node_spanned_pages; i++) {
> - struct page *page;
> - unsigned long pfn = pgdat->node_start_pfn + i;
> + for (pfn = start; pfn < end; pfn++) {
> + struct page *page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
>
You need to check pfn_valid() before using pfn_to_page().
> - if (unlikely(!(i % MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES)))
> + if (unlikely(!(pfn % MAX_ORDER_NR_PAGES)))
> touch_nmi_watchdog();
>
> - if (!pfn_valid(pfn))
> + if (!memmap_valid_within(pfn, page, zone))
> continue;
>
You need both the pfn_valid() check and the memmap_valid_within() as
memmap_valid_within() unconditionally returns 1 for most architectures. If
you applied this patch as-is, memory holes in a zone will cause big problems -
random results at best and invalid memory references at worst.
> - page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
> -
> if (PageHighMem(page))
> highmem++;
>
> @@ -46,7 +44,6 @@ void show_mem(void)
>
> total++;
> }
> - pgdat_resize_unlock(pgdat, &flags);
> }
>
> printk(KERN_INFO "%lu pages RAM\n", total);
> --
> 1.6.2.1.135.gde769
>
--
Mel Gorman
Part-time Phd Student Linux Technology Center
University of Limerick IBM Dublin Software Lab
--
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>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-06 14:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-05 8:29 [PATCH] Double check memmap is actually valid with a memmap has unexpected holes Mel Gorman
2009-05-05 8:36 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2009-05-05 8:49 ` Mel Gorman
2009-05-13 16:34 ` [PATCH] Double check memmap is actually valid with a memmap has unexpected holes V2 Mel Gorman
2009-05-13 19:48 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-14 8:39 ` Mel Gorman
2009-05-17 16:27 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2009-05-05 11:06 ` [PATCH] Double check memmap is actually valid with a memmap has unexpected holes Johannes Weiner
2009-05-06 14:31 ` Mel Gorman [this message]
2009-05-06 15:50 ` Johannes Weiner
2009-05-07 5:29 ` Yasunori Goto
2009-05-14 17:02 ` Paul Mundt
2009-05-06 19:20 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
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=20090506143059.GB20709@csn.ul.ie \
--to=mel@csn.ul.ie \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fred99@carolina.rr.com \
--cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
--cc=hartleys@visionengravers.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mcrapet@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).