Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: keep nid around during hot-remove

David Hildenbrand
2024-08-07T15:24:08Z

On 07.08.24 16:40, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 7:50 AM David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 07.08.24 13:32, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 07.08.24 00:14, Pasha Tatashin wrote:
>>>> nid is needed during memory hot-remove in order to account the
>>>> information about the memmap overhead that is being removed.
>>>>
>>>> In addition, we cannot use page_pgdat(pfn_to_page(pfn)) during
>>>> hotremove after remove_pfn_range_from_zone().
>>>>
>>>> We also cannot determine nid from walking through memblocks after
>>>> remove_memory_block_devices() is called.
>>>>
>>>> Therefore, pass nid down from the beginning of hotremove to where
>>>> it is used for the accounting purposes.
>>>
>>> I was happy to finally remove that nid parameter for good in:
>>>
>>> commit 65a2aa5f482ed0c1b5afb9e6b0b9e0b16bb8b616
>>> Author: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>>> Date: Tue Sep 7 19:55:04 2021 -0700
>>>
>>> mm/memory_hotplug: remove nid parameter from arch_remove_memory()
>>>
>>> To ask the real question: Do we really need this counter per-nid at all?
>>>
>>> Seems to over-complicate things.
>>
>> Case in point: I think the handling is wrong?
>>
>> Just because some memory belongs to a nid doesn't mean that the vmemmap
>> was allocated from that nid?
>
> I believe when we hot-add we use nid for the memory that is being
> added to account vmemmap, and when we do hot-remove we also use nid of
> the memory that is being removed. But, you are correct, this does not
> guarantee that the actual vmemmap memory is being allocated or removed
> from the given nid.

Right. For boot memory that we might want to unplug later it might be
different. I recall that with "movable_node", we might end up allocating
the vmemmap from remote nodes, such that all memory of a node stays
movable. That's why __earlyonly_bootmem_alloc() ends up calling
memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw(), to fallback to other nodes if required.

>
>> Wouldn't we want to look at the actual nid the vmemmap page belongs to
>> that we are removing?
>
> I am now looking into converting this counter to be system wide, i.e.
> vm_event, it is all done under hotplug lock, so there is no
> contention.

That would be easiest, assuming per-node information is not strictly
required for now.