Re: [RESEND] x86: numa: setup_node_data(): drop dead code and rename function

David Rientjes
2014-09-16T00:13:44Z

On Mon, 15 Sep 2014, Luiz Capitulino wrote:

> The setup_node_data() function allocates a pg_data_t object, inserts it
> into the node_data[] array and initializes the following fields: node_id,
> node_start_pfn and node_spanned_pages.
>
> However, a few function calls later during the kernel boot,
> free_area_init_node() re-initializes those fields, possibly with
> setup_node_data() is not used.
>
> This causes a small glitch when running Linux as a hyperv numa guest:
>
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: PXM 0 -> APIC 0x00 -> Node 0
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: PXM 0 -> APIC 0x01 -> Node 0
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: PXM 1 -> APIC 0x02 -> Node 1
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: PXM 1 -> APIC 0x03 -> Node 1
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 0 PXM 0 [mem 0x00000000-0x7fffffff]
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 1 PXM 1 [mem 0x80200000-0xf7ffffff]
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 1 PXM 1 [mem 0x100000000-0x1081fffff]
> [ 0.000000] NUMA: Node 1 [mem 0x80200000-0xf7ffffff] + [mem 0x100000000-0x1081fffff] -> [mem 0x80200000-0x1081fffff]
> [ 0.000000] Initmem setup node 0 [mem 0x00000000-0x7fffffff]
> [ 0.000000] NODE_DATA [mem 0x7ffdc000-0x7ffeffff]
> [ 0.000000] Initmem setup node 1 [mem 0x80800000-0x1081fffff]
> [ 0.000000] NODE_DATA [mem 0x1081ea000-0x1081fdfff]
> [ 0.000000] crashkernel: memory value expected
> [ 0.000000] [ffffea0000000000-ffffea0001ffffff] PMD -> [ffff88007de00000-ffff88007fdfffff] on node 0
> [ 0.000000] [ffffea0002000000-ffffea00043fffff] PMD -> [ffff880105600000-ffff8801077fffff] on node 1
> [ 0.000000] Zone ranges:
> [ 0.000000] DMA [mem 0x00001000-0x00ffffff]
> [ 0.000000] DMA32 [mem 0x01000000-0xffffffff]
> [ 0.000000] Normal [mem 0x100000000-0x1081fffff]
> [ 0.000000] Movable zone start for each node
> [ 0.000000] Early memory node ranges
> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x00001000-0x0009efff]
> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x00100000-0x7ffeffff]
> [ 0.000000] node 1: [mem 0x80200000-0xf7ffffff]
> [ 0.000000] node 1: [mem 0x100000000-0x1081fffff]
> [ 0.000000] On node 0 totalpages: 524174
> [ 0.000000] DMA zone: 64 pages used for memmap
> [ 0.000000] DMA zone: 21 pages reserved
> [ 0.000000] DMA zone: 3998 pages, LIFO batch:0
> [ 0.000000] DMA32 zone: 8128 pages used for memmap
> [ 0.000000] DMA32 zone: 520176 pages, LIFO batch:31
> [ 0.000000] On node 1 totalpages: 524288
> [ 0.000000] DMA32 zone: 7672 pages used for memmap
> [ 0.000000] DMA32 zone: 491008 pages, LIFO batch:31
> [ 0.000000] Normal zone: 520 pages used for memmap
> [ 0.000000] Normal zone: 33280 pages, LIFO batch:7
>
> In this dmesg, the SRAT table reports that the memory range for node 1
> starts at 0x80200000. However, the line starting with "Initmem" reports
> that node 1 memory range starts at 0x80800000. The "Initmem" line is
> reported by setup_node_data() and is wrong, because the kernel ends up
> using the range as reported in the SRAT table.
>
> This commit drops all that dead code from setup_node_data(), renames it to
> alloc_node_data() and adds a printk() to free_area_init_node() so that we
> report a node's memory range accurately.
>
> Here's the same dmesg section with this patch applied:
>
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: PXM 0 -> APIC 0x00 -> Node 0
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: PXM 0 -> APIC 0x01 -> Node 0
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: PXM 1 -> APIC 0x02 -> Node 1
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: PXM 1 -> APIC 0x03 -> Node 1
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 0 PXM 0 [mem 0x00000000-0x7fffffff]
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 1 PXM 1 [mem 0x80200000-0xf7ffffff]
> [ 0.000000] SRAT: Node 1 PXM 1 [mem 0x100000000-0x1081fffff]
> [ 0.000000] NUMA: Node 1 [mem 0x80200000-0xf7ffffff] + [mem 0x100000000-0x1081fffff] -> [mem 0x80200000-0x1081fffff]
> [ 0.000000] NODE_DATA(0) allocated [mem 0x7ffdc000-0x7ffeffff]
> [ 0.000000] NODE_DATA(1) allocated [mem 0x1081ea000-0x1081fdfff]
> [ 0.000000] crashkernel: memory value expected
> [ 0.000000] [ffffea0000000000-ffffea0001ffffff] PMD -> [ffff88007de00000-ffff88007fdfffff] on node 0
> [ 0.000000] [ffffea0002000000-ffffea00043fffff] PMD -> [ffff880105600000-ffff8801077fffff] on node 1
> [ 0.000000] Zone ranges:
> [ 0.000000] DMA [mem 0x00001000-0x00ffffff]
> [ 0.000000] DMA32 [mem 0x01000000-0xffffffff]
> [ 0.000000] Normal [mem 0x100000000-0x1081fffff]
> [ 0.000000] Movable zone start for each node
> [ 0.000000] Early memory node ranges
> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x00001000-0x0009efff]
> [ 0.000000] node 0: [mem 0x00100000-0x7ffeffff]
> [ 0.000000] node 1: [mem 0x80200000-0xf7ffffff]
> [ 0.000000] node 1: [mem 0x100000000-0x1081fffff]
> [ 0.000000] Initmem setup node 0 [mem 0x00001000-0x7ffeffff]
> [ 0.000000] On node 0 totalpages: 524174
> [ 0.000000] DMA zone: 64 pages used for memmap
> [ 0.000000] DMA zone: 21 pages reserved
> [ 0.000000] DMA zone: 3998 pages, LIFO batch:0
> [ 0.000000] DMA32 zone: 8128 pages used for memmap
> [ 0.000000] DMA32 zone: 520176 pages, LIFO batch:31
> [ 0.000000] Initmem setup node 1 [mem 0x80200000-0x1081fffff]
> [ 0.000000] On node 1 totalpages: 524288
> [ 0.000000] DMA32 zone: 7672 pages used for memmap
> [ 0.000000] DMA32 zone: 491008 pages, LIFO batch:31
> [ 0.000000] Normal zone: 520 pages used for memmap
> [ 0.000000] Normal zone: 33280 pages, LIFO batch:7
>
> This commit was tested on a two node bare-metal NUMA machine and Linux as
> a numa guest on hyperv and qemu/kvm.
>
> PS: The wrong memory range reported by setup_node_data() seems to be
> harmless in the current kernel because it's just not used. However,
> that bad range is used in kernel 2.6.32 to initialize the old boot
> memory allocator, which causes a crash during boot.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
> Cc: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@jp.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
> Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
> Cc: David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
> Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> ---
>
> I posted this patch more than two months ago. Andrew picked it up and it
> rested in the -mm tree for a couple of weeks. Andrew dropped it from -mm
> to move it forward, but looks like it hasn't been picked by anyone else
> since then. Resending...
>

This is still in linux-next-20140915 and I doubt it's 3.17 material so I'd
wait for Andrew to take care of it.