On 11/13/2018 05:49 AM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 09, 2018 at 05:03:06PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/09/2018 12:17 PM, Naoya Horiguchi wrote:
>>> The new function is a reverse operation of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page()
>>> to adjust unpoison_memory() to the new semantics.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> snip
>>
>>> +
>>> +/*
>>> + * Reverse operation of set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(), which is expected
>>> + * to work only on error pages isolated from buddy allocator.
>>> + */
>>> +bool clear_hwpoison_free_buddy_page(struct page *page)
>>> +{
>>> + struct zone *zone = page_zone(page);
>>> + bool unpoisoned = false;
>>> +
>>> + spin_lock(&zone->lock);
>>> + if (TestClearPageHWPoison(page)) {
>>> + unsigned long pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
>>> + int migratetype = get_pfnblock_migratetype(page, pfn);
>>> +
>>> + __free_one_page(page, pfn, zone, 0, migratetype);
>>> + unpoisoned = true;
>>> + }
>>> + spin_unlock(&zone->lock);
>>> + return unpoisoned;
>>> +}
>>> #endif
>>>
>>
>> Though there are multiple page state checks in unpoison_memory() leading
>> upto clearing HWPoison flag, the page must not be in buddy already if
>> __free_one_page() would be called on it.
>
> Yes, you're right.
> clear_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() is intended to cancel the isolation by
> set_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() which removes the target page from buddy allocator,
> so the page clear_hwpoison_free_buddy_page() tries to handle is not a buddy page
> actually (not linked to any freelist).
Got it. Thanks for the explanation.
