Linux-mm Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
To: Yuan Liu <yuan1.liu@intel.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
	Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
	Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Nanhai Zou <nanhai.zou@intel.com>,
	Pan Deng <pan.deng@intel.com>, Tianyou Li <tianyou.li@intel.com>,
	Chen Zhang <zhangchen.kidd@jd.com>,
	Jason Zeng <jason.zeng@intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] mm/memory_hotplug: improve shrink_zone_span() subsection boundary checks
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2026 02:49:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260725024952.65lfm2s676obpoue@master> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260723084946.189392-3-yuan1.liu@intel.com>

On Thu, Jul 23, 2026 at 04:49:46AM -0400, Yuan Liu wrote:
>When shrinking a zone span after removing a PFN range,
>find_smallest_section_pfn() and find_biggest_section_pfn()
>only checked one edge PFN in each subsection for nid/zone matching.
>
>If a memory or hole boundary falls in the middle of a subsection,
>that edge PFN may belong to a different nid/zone, causing the helpers
>to miss a valid PFN within that subsection.
>
>Fix this by checking both subsection edge PFNs for nid/zone matching.
>Keep a single pfn_to_online_page() check per subsection, since online
>state is the same for all PFNs in a subsection.
>
>Reviewed-by: Jason Zeng <jason.zeng@intel.com>
>Signed-off-by: Yuan Liu <yuan1.liu@intel.com>
>---
> mm/memory_hotplug.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>index 4c699fd9c479..3a281d595207 100644
>--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
>@@ -427,17 +427,24 @@ static unsigned long find_smallest_section_pfn(int nid, struct zone *zone,
> 				     unsigned long start_pfn,
> 				     unsigned long end_pfn)
> {
>-	for (; start_pfn < end_pfn; start_pfn += PAGES_PER_SUBSECTION) {
>-		if (unlikely(!pfn_to_online_page(start_pfn)))
>-			continue;
>+	unsigned long next_pfn;
> 
>-		if (unlikely(pfn_to_nid(start_pfn) != nid))
>-			continue;
>+	for (; start_pfn < end_pfn; start_pfn = next_pfn) {
>+		unsigned long tail_pfn;
> 
>-		if (zone != page_zone(pfn_to_page(start_pfn)))
>+		next_pfn = start_pfn + PAGES_PER_SUBSECTION;
>+		tail_pfn = next_pfn - 1;
>+
>+		if (unlikely(!pfn_to_online_page(start_pfn)))
> 			continue;
> 
>-		return start_pfn;
>+		if (likely(pfn_to_nid(start_pfn) == nid) &&
>+		    zone == page_zone(pfn_to_page(start_pfn)))
>+			return start_pfn;
>+
>+		if (likely(pfn_to_nid(tail_pfn) == nid) &&
>+		    zone == page_zone(pfn_to_page(tail_pfn)))
>+			return start_pfn;

Here we are checking range [start_pfn, tail_pfn]. When we come here, it means
start_pfn's nid or zone doesn't match our expectation. But if tail_pfn does,
why it still return start_pfn?

> 	}
> 
> 	return 0;
>@@ -448,21 +455,26 @@ static unsigned long find_biggest_section_pfn(int nid, struct zone *zone,
> 				    unsigned long start_pfn,
> 				    unsigned long end_pfn)
> {
>-	unsigned long pfn;
>+	unsigned long pfn, prev_pfn;
> 
> 	/* pfn is the end pfn of a memory section. */
> 	pfn = end_pfn - 1;
>-	for (; pfn >= start_pfn; pfn -= PAGES_PER_SUBSECTION) {
>-		if (unlikely(!pfn_to_online_page(pfn)))
>-			continue;
>+	for (; pfn >= start_pfn; pfn = prev_pfn) {
>+		unsigned long head_pfn;
> 
>-		if (unlikely(pfn_to_nid(pfn) != nid))
>-			continue;
>+		prev_pfn = pfn - PAGES_PER_SUBSECTION;
>+		head_pfn = prev_pfn + 1;
> 
>-		if (zone != page_zone(pfn_to_page(pfn)))
>+		if (unlikely(!pfn_to_online_page(pfn)))
> 			continue;
> 
>-		return pfn;
>+		if (likely(pfn_to_nid(pfn) == nid) &&
>+		    zone == page_zone(pfn_to_page(pfn)))
>+			return pfn;
>+
>+		if (likely(pfn_to_nid(head_pfn) == nid) &&
>+		    zone == page_zone(pfn_to_page(head_pfn)))
>+			return pfn;
> 	}
> 
> 	return 0;
>-- 
>2.47.3

-- 
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me


      reply	other threads:[~2026-07-25  2:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-23  8:49 [PATCH v6 0/2] mm/memory_hotplug: optimize zone contiguous check when changing pfn range Yuan Liu
2026-07-23  8:49 ` [PATCH v6 1/2] " Yuan Liu
2026-07-23  8:49 ` [PATCH v6 2/2] mm/memory_hotplug: improve shrink_zone_span() subsection boundary checks Yuan Liu
2026-07-25  2:49   ` Wei Yang [this message]

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=20260725024952.65lfm2s676obpoue@master \
    --to=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
    --cc=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=jason.zeng@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=nanhai.zou@intel.com \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=pan.deng@intel.com \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=tianyou.li@intel.com \
    --cc=yuan1.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=zhangchen.kidd@jd.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