linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Anton Blanchard <anton@au1.ibm.com>,
	Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>, Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>,
	Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
	Robert Jennings <rcj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] bootmem/sparsemem: remove limit constraint in alloc_bootmem_section
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 15:28:30 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120229152830.22fc72a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120229181233.GF5136@linux.vnet.ibm.com>

On Wed, 29 Feb 2012 10:12:33 -0800
Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:

> While testing AMS (Active Memory Sharing) / CMO (Cooperative Memory
> Overcommit) on powerpc, we tripped the following:
> 
> kernel BUG at mm/bootmem.c:483!
>
> ...
> 
> This is
> 
>         BUG_ON(limit && goal + size > limit);
> 
> and after some debugging, it seems that
> 
> 	goal = 0x7ffff000000
> 	limit = 0x80000000000
> 
> and sparse_early_usemaps_alloc_node ->
> sparse_early_usemaps_alloc_pgdat_section calls
> 
> 	return alloc_bootmem_section(usemap_size() * count, section_nr);
> 
> This is on a system with 8TB available via the AMS pool, and as a quirk
> of AMS in firmware, all of that memory shows up in node 0. So, we end up
> with an allocation that will fail the goal/limit constraints. In theory,
> we could "fall-back" to alloc_bootmem_node() in
> sparse_early_usemaps_alloc_node(), but since we actually have HOTREMOVE
> defined, we'll BUG_ON() instead. A simple solution appears to be to
> unconditionally remove the limit condition in alloc_bootmem_section,
> meaning allocations are allowed to cross section boundaries (necessary
> for systems of this size).
> 
> Johannes Weiner pointed out that if alloc_bootmem_section() no longer
> guarantees section-locality, we need check_usemap_section_nr() to print
> possible cross-dependencies between node descriptors and the usemaps
> allocated through it. That makes the two loops in
> sparse_early_usemaps_alloc_node() identical, so re-factor the code a
> bit.

The patch is a bit scary now, so I think we should merge it into
3.4-rc1 and then backport it into 3.3.1 if nothing blows up.

Do you think it should be backported into 3.3.x?  Earlier kernels?

Also, this?

--- a/mm/bootmem.c~bootmem-sparsemem-remove-limit-constraint-in-alloc_bootmem_section-fix
+++ a/mm/bootmem.c
@@ -766,14 +766,13 @@ void * __init alloc_bootmem_section(unsi
 				    unsigned long section_nr)
 {
 	bootmem_data_t *bdata;
-	unsigned long pfn, goal, limit;
+	unsigned long pfn, goal;
 
 	pfn = section_nr_to_pfn(section_nr);
 	goal = pfn << PAGE_SHIFT;
-	limit = 0;
 	bdata = &bootmem_node_data[early_pfn_to_nid(pfn)];
 
-	return alloc_bootmem_core(bdata, size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, goal, limit);
+	return alloc_bootmem_core(bdata, size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES, goal, 0);
 }
 #endif
 
_

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-02-29 23:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-02-24 19:33 [PATCH] sparsemem/bootmem: catch greater than section size allocations Nishanth Aravamudan
2012-02-28 13:53 ` Johannes Weiner
2012-02-28 20:11   ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2012-02-29  9:17     ` Johannes Weiner
2012-02-28 15:47 ` Mel Gorman
2012-02-29 18:12   ` [PATCH v2] bootmem/sparsemem: remove limit constraint in alloc_bootmem_section Nishanth Aravamudan
2012-02-29 18:45     ` Johannes Weiner
2012-02-29 23:28     ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2012-03-01  0:03       ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2012-03-01 23:12       ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2012-03-01 11:42     ` Mel Gorman

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=20120229152830.22fc72a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=anton@au1.ibm.com \
    --cc=hannes@cmpxchg.org \
    --cc=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mgorman@suse.de \
    --cc=nacc@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=rcj@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    /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).