From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759470AbdEOGSg (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2017 02:18:36 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:60430 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758945AbdEOGSf (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2017 02:18:35 -0400 Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 08:18:26 +0200 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: LKML , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Steven Rostedt , Mark Rutland , Mel Gorman Subject: Re: [patch 08/18] mm: Adjust system_state check Message-ID: <20170515061826.GB30019@kroah.com> References: <20170514182716.347236777@linutronix.de> <20170514183613.080486673@linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170514183613.080486673@linutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.2 (2017-04-18) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, May 14, 2017 at 08:27:24PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > To enable smp_processor_id() and might_sleep() debug checks earlier, it's > required to add system states between SYSTEM_BOOTING and SYSTEM_RUNNING. > > get_nid_for_pfn() checks for system_state == BOOTING to decide whether to > use early_pfn_to_nid() when CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT=y. > > That check is dubious, because the switch to state RUNNING happes way after > page_alloc_init_late() has been invoked. > > Change the check to less than RUNNING state so it covers the new > intermediate states as well. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner > Cc: Mel Gorman > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman > --- > drivers/base/node.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > --- a/drivers/base/node.c > +++ b/drivers/base/node.c > @@ -377,7 +377,7 @@ static int __ref get_nid_for_pfn(unsigne > if (!pfn_valid_within(pfn)) > return -1; > #ifdef CONFIG_DEFERRED_STRUCT_PAGE_INIT > - if (system_state == SYSTEM_BOOTING) > + if (system_state < SYSTEM_RUNNING) Someone better comment the place where these are defined that they need to be in a specific order, I don't think they have been tested this way in the past... With that change: Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman thanks, greg k-h