On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:21:54AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Thu 21-02-19 10:42:12, Oscar Salvador wrote: > [...] > > diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c > > index d5f7afda67db..04f6695b648c 100644 > > --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c > > +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c > > @@ -1337,8 +1337,7 @@ static unsigned long scan_movable_pages(unsigned long start, unsigned long end) > > if (!PageHuge(page)) > > continue; > > head = compound_head(page); > > - if (hugepage_migration_supported(page_hstate(head)) && > > - page_huge_active(head)) > > + if (page_huge_active(head)) > > return pfn; > > skip = (1 << compound_order(head)) - (page - head); > > pfn += skip - 1; > > Is this part correct? Say we have a gigantic page which is migrateable. > Now scan_movable_pages would skip it and we will not migrate it, no? All non-migrateable hugepages should have been caught in has_unmovable_pages: <-- if (PageHuge(page)) { struct page *head = compound_head(page); unsigned int skip_pages; if (!hugepage_migration_supported(page_hstate(head))) goto unmovable; --> So, there is no need to check again for migrateability here, as it is something that does not change. To put it in another way, all huge pages found in scan_movable_pages() should be migrateable. In scan_movable_pages() we just need to check whether the hugepage, gigantic or not, is in use (aka active) to migrate it. > > > @@ -1378,10 +1377,6 @@ do_migrate_range(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn) > > > > if (PageHuge(page)) { > > struct page *head = compound_head(page); > > - if (compound_order(head) > PFN_SECTION_SHIFT) { > > - ret = -EBUSY; > > - break; > > - } > > pfn = page_to_pfn(head) + (1<<compound_order(head)) - 1; > > isolate_huge_page(head, &source); > > continue; > > I think it would be much easier to have only this check removed in this > patch. Because it is obviously bogus and wrong as well. The other check > might be considered in a separate patch. I do not have an issue sending both changes separedtly. I mean, this check is the one we need to remove in order to make 1Gb-hugetlb offlining to proceed. The removed check from scan_movable_pages() is only removed because it is redundant as we already checked for that condition in has_unmovable_pages() (when isolating the range). -- Oscar Salvador SUSE L3