From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
mpe@ellerman.id.au, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
npiggin@gmail.com, christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/7] mm/hotplug: Embed vmem_altmap details in memory block
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 11:41:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aa27b96e-5296-0324-d9d3-07ab1ee969d0@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230725100212.531277-7-aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
On 25.07.23 12:02, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote:
> With memmap on memory, some architecture needs more details w.r.t altmap
> such as base_pfn, end_pfn, etc to unmap vmemmap memory. Instead of
> computing them again when we remove a memory block, embed vmem_altmap
> details in struct memory_block if we are using memmap on memory block
> feature.
>
> No functional change in this patch
>
> Signed-off-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
[...]
>
> static int add_memory_block(unsigned long block_id, unsigned long state,
> - unsigned long nr_vmemmap_pages,
> + struct vmem_altmap *altmap,
> struct memory_group *group)
> {
> struct memory_block *mem;
> @@ -744,7 +751,14 @@ static int add_memory_block(unsigned long block_id, unsigned long state,
> mem->start_section_nr = block_id * sections_per_block;
> mem->state = state;
> mem->nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
> - mem->nr_vmemmap_pages = nr_vmemmap_pages;
> + if (altmap) {
> + mem->altmap = kmalloc(sizeof(struct vmem_altmap), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!mem->altmap) {
> + kfree(mem);
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + }
> + memcpy(mem->altmap, altmap, sizeof(*altmap));
> + }
I'm wondering if we should instead let the caller do the alloc/free. So we would alloc
int the caller and would only store the pointer.
Before removing the memory block, we would clear the pointer and free it in the caller.
IOW, when removing a memory block and we still have an altmap set, something would be wrong.
See below on try_remove_memory() handling.
[...]
> -static int get_nr_vmemmap_pages_cb(struct memory_block *mem, void *arg)
> +static int get_vmemmap_altmap_cb(struct memory_block *mem, void *arg)
> {
> + struct vmem_altmap *altmap = (struct vmem_altmap *)arg;
> /*
> - * If not set, continue with the next block.
> + * If we have any pages allocated from altmap
> + * return the altmap details and break callback.
> */
> - return mem->nr_vmemmap_pages;
> + if (mem->altmap) {
> + memcpy(altmap, mem->altmap, sizeof(struct vmem_altmap));
> + return 1;
> + }
> + return 0;
> }
>
> static int check_cpu_on_node(int nid)
> @@ -2146,9 +2152,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(try_offline_node);
>
> static int __ref try_remove_memory(u64 start, u64 size)
> {
> - struct vmem_altmap mhp_altmap = {};
> - struct vmem_altmap *altmap = NULL;
> - unsigned long nr_vmemmap_pages;
> + int ret;
> + struct vmem_altmap mhp_altmap, *altmap = NULL;
> int rc = 0, nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
>
> BUG_ON(check_hotplug_memory_range(start, size));
> @@ -2171,24 +2176,15 @@ static int __ref try_remove_memory(u64 start, u64 size)
> * the same granularity it was added - a single memory block.
> */
> if (mhp_memmap_on_memory()) {
> - nr_vmemmap_pages = walk_memory_blocks(start, size, NULL,
> - get_nr_vmemmap_pages_cb);
> - if (nr_vmemmap_pages) {
> + ret = walk_memory_blocks(start, size, &mhp_altmap,
> + get_vmemmap_altmap_cb);
> + if (ret) {
> if (size != memory_block_size_bytes()) {
> pr_warn("Refuse to remove %#llx - %#llx,"
> "wrong granularity\n",
> start, start + size);
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> -
> - /*
> - * Let remove_pmd_table->free_hugepage_table do the
> - * right thing if we used vmem_altmap when hot-adding
> - * the range.
> - */
> - mhp_altmap.base_pfn = PHYS_PFN(start);
> - mhp_altmap.free = nr_vmemmap_pages;
> - mhp_altmap.alloc = nr_vmemmap_pages;
> altmap = &mhp_altmap;
> }
Instead of that, I suggest (whitespace damage expected):
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index 3f231cf1b410..f6860df64549 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -1956,12 +1956,19 @@ static int check_memblock_offlined_cb(struct memory_block *mem, void *arg)
return 0;
}
-static int get_nr_vmemmap_pages_cb(struct memory_block *mem, void *arg)
+static int test_has_altmap_cb(struct memory_block *mem, void *arg)
{
- /*
- * If not set, continue with the next block.
- */
- return mem->nr_vmemmap_pages;
+ struct memory_block **mem_ptr = (struct memory_block **)arg;
+
+ if (mem->altmap) {
+ /*
+ * We're not taking a reference on the memory block; it
+ * it cannot vanish while we're about to that memory ourselves.
+ */
+ *mem_ptr = mem;
+ return 1;
+ }
+ return 0;
}
static int check_cpu_on_node(int nid)
@@ -2036,9 +2043,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(try_offline_node);
static int __ref try_remove_memory(u64 start, u64 size)
{
- struct vmem_altmap mhp_altmap = {};
struct vmem_altmap *altmap = NULL;
- unsigned long nr_vmemmap_pages;
int rc = 0, nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
BUG_ON(check_hotplug_memory_range(start, size));
@@ -2061,9 +2066,9 @@ static int __ref try_remove_memory(u64 start, u64 size)
* the same granularity it was added - a single memory block.
*/
if (mhp_memmap_on_memory()) {
- nr_vmemmap_pages = walk_memory_blocks(start, size, NULL,
- get_nr_vmemmap_pages_cb);
- if (nr_vmemmap_pages) {
+ struct memory_block *mem;
+
+ if (walk_memory_blocks(start, size, &mem, test_has_altmap_cb)) {
if (size != memory_block_size_bytes()) {
pr_warn("Refuse to remove %#llx - %#llx,"
"wrong granularity\n",
@@ -2072,12 +2077,11 @@ static int __ref try_remove_memory(u64 start, u64 size)
}
/*
- * Let remove_pmd_table->free_hugepage_table do the
- * right thing if we used vmem_altmap when hot-adding
- * the range.
+ * Clear the altmap from the memory block before we
+ * remove it; we'll take care of freeing the altmap.
*/
- mhp_altmap.alloc = nr_vmemmap_pages;
- altmap = &mhp_altmap;
+ altmap = mem->altmap;
+ mem->altmap = NULL;
}
}
@@ -2094,6 +2098,9 @@ static int __ref try_remove_memory(u64 start, u64 size)
arch_remove_memory(start, size, altmap);
+ if (altmap)
+ kfree(altmap);
+
if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARCH_KEEP_MEMBLOCK)) {
memblock_phys_free(start, size);
memblock_remove(start, size);
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-26 9:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-25 10:02 [PATCH v5 0/7] Add support for memmap on memory feature on ppc64 Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-07-25 10:02 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] mm/hotplug: Simplify ARCH_MHP_MEMMAP_ON_MEMORY_ENABLE kconfig Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-07-25 10:02 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] mm/hotplug: Allow memmap on memory hotplug request to fallback Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-07-25 10:02 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] mm/hotplug: Allow architecture to override memmap on memory support check Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-07-25 10:02 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] mm/hotplug: Support memmap_on_memory when memmap is not aligned to pageblocks Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-07-25 18:06 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-26 4:25 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-07-26 9:04 ` David Hildenbrand
[not found] ` <9d1448d3-a43a-5305-68aa-d82111fe077a@linux.ibm.com>
2023-07-26 16:39 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-25 10:02 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] powerpc/book3s64/memhotplug: Enable memmap on memory for radix Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-07-25 10:09 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-25 10:02 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] mm/hotplug: Embed vmem_altmap details in memory block Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-07-26 9:41 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2023-07-26 10:31 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-07-26 16:43 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-25 10:02 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] mm/hotplug: Enable runtime update of memmap_on_memory parameter Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-07-25 17:52 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-25 10:06 ` [PATCH v5 0/7] Add support for memmap on memory feature on ppc64 David Hildenbrand
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=aa27b96e-5296-0324-d9d3-07ab1ee969d0@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=vishal.l.verma@intel.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).