From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6993C433FE for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 17:42:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 73B1B6B0074; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 13:42:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 69D276B0075; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 13:42:59 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 516836B0078; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 13:42:59 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0010.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.10]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 427CB6B0074 for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 13:42:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin28.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay07.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C20E1605B3 for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 17:42:59 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80096480478.28.E5F0F81 Received: from mail-pj1-f51.google.com (mail-pj1-f51.google.com [209.85.216.51]) by imf21.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A783C1C0003 for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 17:42:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pj1-f51.google.com with SMTP id d13-20020a17090a3b0d00b00213519dfe4aso5154816pjc.2 for ; Fri, 04 Nov 2022 10:42:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=f+XDeehPqNp624nEDoMBsjLPMyAJCxTSXH00KpaKjDM=; b=Z9W5ylLMWmuZ9SryJuhJRN6uHAb5shD1HeVtH7f/1sPFa5bCW/gxHhDhv2U2xM0Q9+ WzD9zdducnvmd5a6yJzl1cfcMvqit9cJVTro5URoQJAFZ+90rBzTHX1dhXzm0AS+LaQ0 RwH6JBMH5aseoQrkbqKBdSQmkqEii7Gh3tee5eMtjU97xH5U7JkPmgL0fgNnx9mL7rLS 5ts9zHbGGk9kploiu77beLpy/dX99+U3p1rsGV8uG/LictREBLL+3DVatyh64o0lHVU6 6FbetaecqW/LW4x2dMmOy+poShuQEHIZs42AmBOsWemA815kMtYmoCo+lbK5Jkz2w3hf RyXg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=f+XDeehPqNp624nEDoMBsjLPMyAJCxTSXH00KpaKjDM=; b=iSI83A0GyN4o3TyHA4KHIhclisEl1szd2cXtzv7cEWJXRa3S6hKXHtcOsjGGI35YI6 rBsG3oNQE6PC6VAZNcByfZf0xxUUhS7DxECRoprKthFoZMNu9eJS45hZOLeT6YvL32gq qG8Py3cEXkOSq4Wx2ry+tPwiLBBFuBwMKvHLZFYr75YC3EztcBrUSp5Qk1rSLt2Oou7b U2g+dsWbSbD1+pIR2QVJjk36Ec+RFaesRHrgz/u0G+W87mjUbtZLrV70ej5UfpXrZwy2 ad9agyeVw7+2ssVS1N8yAxIdZ08n69YSXiLd/SB7d3hDO1EZ/r5Dl0f8ttrKhnA3Q5rD rljg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2zdFDcJi2r+VCKbkDtvxN7SxS/cssIjRDvPYbqy7Wq/9LHCQiC pCgJPHH3kr2cW3nSEj2UJSdJtrz4tlrDGn663hM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM70dPgb2K+IgBGRdaJsonN7jpbfLhYHMku638SrYX6NPEC+Uhr7/ynyZFb+QSitnc0TS3Ro9fKFeVQxHoWYvjQ= X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d512:b0:181:f1f4:fcb4 with SMTP id b18-20020a170902d51200b00181f1f4fcb4mr37068477plg.102.1667583777463; Fri, 04 Nov 2022 10:42:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20221103213641.7296-1-shy828301@gmail.com> <20221103213641.7296-2-shy828301@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Yang Shi Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 10:42:45 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH 2/2] mm: don't warn if the node is offlined To: Michal Hocko Cc: zokeefe@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf21.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=Z9W5ylLM; spf=pass (imf21.hostedemail.com: domain of shy828301@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.51 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shy828301@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1667583778; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=SzCYBoRRarPrECk2MYkCm+0m+D+MJJLe/CLVidjte/Q+AST9rI7/FrXulhBRa0JjRW40rH Pks1wfCIbeNY2wCFGjNl8oHWVW84aezjwt39AsBx5zFX555qWMfdgHnX4RZQX3VfkBrU89 aLuQC+5wKf4LquhQasR6J0uwvsOUktM= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1667583778; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=f+XDeehPqNp624nEDoMBsjLPMyAJCxTSXH00KpaKjDM=; b=k63t4gmFdgeOMzA4rnsVAubzvPwGFpxglnhZ9q4djUkByMIi9YwduaDG3jxBhrUuJkBipg zNtLm04ti7tVkXDdYILSsiejLXYfqVBypKdP/iMtrQ5Ni/K6joTy0IzdvZOmPFoSWgBFpm qehikuZDa6QXJEObvr7Ndf1k+n26thY= X-Stat-Signature: jtogu8ck4ax7kzykk8xy5t9i7jp5hagt X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: A783C1C0003 Authentication-Results: imf21.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=Z9W5ylLM; spf=pass (imf21.hostedemail.com: domain of shy828301@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.51 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shy828301@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam12 X-HE-Tag: 1667583778-922778 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 2:56 AM Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Fri 04-11-22 10:35:21, Michal Hocko wrote: > [...] > > diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h > > index ef4aea3b356e..308daafc4871 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/gfp.h > > +++ b/include/linux/gfp.h > > @@ -227,7 +227,10 @@ static inline > > struct folio *__folio_alloc_node(gfp_t gfp, unsigned int order, int nid) > > { > > VM_BUG_ON(nid < 0 || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES); > > - VM_WARN_ON((gfp & __GFP_THISNODE) && !node_online(nid)); > > + if((gfp & __GFP_THISNODE) && !node_online(nid)) { > > or maybe even better > if ((gfp & (__GFP_THISNODE|__GFP_NOWARN) == __GFP_THISNODE|__GFP_NOWARN) && !node_online(nid)) > > because it doesn't really make much sense to dump this information if > the allocation failure is going to provide sufficient (and even more > comprehensive) context for the failure. It looks more hairy but this can > be hidden in a nice little helper shared between the two callers. Thanks a lot for the suggestion, printing warning if the gfp flag allows sounds like a good idea to me. Will adopt it. But the check should look like: if ((gfp & __GFP_THISNODE) && !(gfp & __GFP_NOWARN) && !node_online(nid)) > > > + pr_warn("%pGg allocation from offline node %d\n", &gfp, nid); > > + dump_stack(); > > + } > > > > return __folio_alloc(gfp, order, nid, NULL); > > } > > -- > > Michal Hocko > > SUSE Labs > > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs