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 lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8DB67CCF9F8 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 14:18:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4d31PY0jg6z303X; Sat, 8 Nov 2025 01:18:25 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip="2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25" ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1762525105; cv=none; b=NNRzkObBDVtCrQCCFfFnsdu67I2yCPXYZtrj4aQepd1Sm9kR//t7cvgESQr9HMf/vh45K9CEzNJqDp+wXkCIbgD3ebh8zzBLfJXI9RVSecvunllNmcOkrj3Vr93d08p++cx3htgtgl00qhZhMhpLWD1R2DJbOTmTrmbN5t/MjZCgoepcfOQTVHJ5PDdjJK6dlKETHXADzNhHtuberbP56W323wbqDtjgjeiF6JdhdwR8tgcJ27LsoNNgwN+3+tSxk+0G2NeiL6CP0lnKWJobE5iq/zQYuNnj7tBEK0ou79QknlH2W2mQAzyxw41Z+2wQ1pwjDina28qBCEronQhkAQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=lists.ozlabs.org; s=201707; t=1762525105; c=relaxed/relaxed; bh=+Vc6+O7CetF6YDo7yqfWzzANHwV9RzFoc3MJqcDn2kw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=mRt5tuS5YUxKf8Yh89TSclFKeD/DoMyHzGjtgtg2sVEOEpygU1Y1hN5IjDyCaCCkZJ4nwSkK5qCu/JGVbviYgXlAblCOIMYC2keM24PUE7aficSm8eyw6z8uIpidJX+KdbeRQ4HrfJ4aAkTwGq4Ugp+uHib/3kaWcR9eMTLJ1vgWZ3FIqHSZNoBujuzFuCA77kokiRH0C2SVbEpPSwLgzko/ziOaQC5b7QNFeHxrsLWUo3qU6mmD7PIByWklOlPxi4zlNx48v3s44JXMd5ODygLu4p/y8JsjdHwChlLb/eSeWx/BP17dyr6oQLPyRXiu1h/KSlHwsNLADFC1fBLDPg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=p6k5mck2; dkim-atps=neutral; spf=pass (client-ip=2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25; helo=tor.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=david@kernel.org; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=p6k5mck2; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25; helo=tor.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=david@kernel.org; receiver=lists.ozlabs.org) Received: from tor.source.kernel.org (tor.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4d31PX0YkTz2yFJ for ; Sat, 8 Nov 2025 01:18:24 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF2BB61902; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 14:18:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D505AC4CEF7; Fri, 7 Nov 2025 14:18:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1762525099; bh=8j2EWeaBmIMINQPODFrhuPQGp+pV+M9qxQAMDoOptJo=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=p6k5mck28BCPSM/jKqftBs9Ap3SWNPoH6QkG7b2myBd9g5YYib3dem5QMrJmqTyDQ gGtIP5cO0Yg25lNDK97SJxTykWz0mGz7z/G4HXeNWEyTcl0M74v+jCsUoflIGAXFV1 7tgjPGXIN9JfOg2+IU2776v3bzdD4ZHGcBiN+Bix7BUjHQDquqyC9Ydr/aozYnhfre 7yQ5ToJfrfhrAW0MmBVleCuqSUXBsDVleuHhXPyRuBwW6GgYy2woMbVG93x6QNX6Br KkFf29eafIPCMG3l4/TnyoTtdvky47q3uXVjbSQQwG3DnYx2KnPOEnfIa+ivp4NX2I fu76tvHPkmXDw== Message-ID: <00763134-2e92-4087-8285-ddb25f843b54@kernel.org> Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2025 15:18:15 +0100 X-Mailing-List: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Archive: , List-Subscribe: , , List-Unsubscribe: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: powerpc/e500: WARNING: at mm/hugetlb.c:4755 hugetlb_add_hstate To: Sourabh Jain , Christophe Leroy , Madhavan Srinivasan , "Ritesh Harjani (IBM)" , linuxppc-dev Cc: Donet Tom , Andrew Morton References: <94377f5c-d4f0-4c0f-b0f6-5bf1cd7305b1@linux.ibm.com> <82ef1da8-44c4-4a58-bd00-9839548cb72d@csgroup.eu> <5e4bc56e-f0ca-45b3-a7c8-114e7009dfd8@linux.ibm.com> From: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <5e4bc56e-f0ca-45b3-a7c8-114e7009dfd8@linux.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 07.11.25 13:35, Sourabh Jain wrote: > > On 07/11/25 14:32, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote: >> On 07.11.25 09:00, Sourabh Jain wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 06/11/25 20:32, David Hildenbrand (Red Hat) wrote: >>>>>> Yes, we discussed that in [1]. >>>>>> >>>>>> We'll have to set ARCH_HAS_GIGANTIC_PAGE on ppc and increase >>>>>> MAX_FOLIO_ORDER, because apparently, there might be ppc configs that >>>>>> have even larger hugetlb sizes than PUDs. >>>>>> >>>>>> @Cristophe, I was under the impression that you would send a fix. Do >>>>>> you >>>>>> want me to prepare something and send it out? >>>>> >>>>> Indeed I would have liked to better understand the implications of all >>>>> this, but I didn't have the time. >>>> >>>> Indeed, too me longer than it should to understand and make up my mind >>>> as well. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> By the way, you would describe the fix better than me so yes if you >>>>> can >>>>> prepare and send a fix please do. >>>> >>>> I just crafted the following. I yet have to test it more, some early >>>> feedback+testing would be appreciated! >>>> >>>>  From 274928854644c49c92515f8675c090dba15a0db6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >>>> From: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" >>>> Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2025 11:31:45 +0100 >>>> Subject: [PATCH] mm: fix MAX_FOLIO_ORDER on some ppc64 configs with >>>> hugetlb >>> >>> b4 did not detect this patch, and manually copying the patch text >>> from this >>> reply also did not apply cleanly on upstream master and linuxppc >>> master/next. >> >> I have it on a branch here: >> >> https://github.com/davidhildenbrand/linux/commit/274928854644c49c92515f8675c090dba15a0db6 >> >> >> https://github.com/davidhildenbrand/linux.git max_folio_order >> > > The above patch resolves the issue reported in this thread. > > Thanks for the fix David. Okay, I'll have to do some more testing (and I've been failing for days to get a ppc64 machine internally provisioned automatically). Will send it out early next week, thanks! -- Cheers David