On Oct 11, 2011, at 2:27 AM, Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 04:28:13PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 16:24:03 -0700
>> Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 03:00:38PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 10 Oct 2011 08:11:19 +0100
>>>> Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> It is expected that memory being brought online is PageReserved
>>>>> similar to what happens when the page allocator is being brought up.
>>>>> Memory is onlined in "memory blocks" which consist of one or more
>>>>> sections. Unfortunately, the code that verifies PageReserved is
>>>>> currently assuming that the memmap backing all these pages is virtually
>>>>> contiguous which is only the case when CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP is set.
>>>>> As a result, memory hot-add is failing on !VMEMMAP configurations
>>>>> with the message;
>>>>>
>>>>> kernel: section number XXX page number 256 not reserved, was it already online?
>>>>>
>>>>> This patch updates the PageReserved check to lookup struct page once
>>>>> per section to guarantee the correct struct page is being checked.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nathan's earlier version of this patch is already in linux-next, via
>>>> Greg. We should drop the old version and get the new one merged
>>>> instead.
>>>
>>> Ok, care to send me what exactly needs to be reverted and what needs to
>>> be added?
>>
>> Drop
>>
>> commit 54f23eb7ba7619de85d8edca6e5336bc33072dbd
>> Author: Nathan Fontenot <nfont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Mon Sep 26 10:22:33 2011 -0500
>>
>> memory hotplug: Correct page reservation checking
>>
>> and replace it with start-of-this-thread.
>>
>> That's assuming that Mel's update passes Nathan's review and testing :)
>
> It passed review and testing with IBM based on a SUSE bug. I thought
> Nathan's patch had been lost as it was posted to linuxppc-dev instead
> of linux-mm. This rework was to improve the changelog and readability.
>
> David correctly pointed out a bug that passed testing because it was
> still checking one page per section. As long as that page was reserved,
> memory hot-add would go ahead. Here is a corrected version.
>
Updated patch has been tested.
-Nathan
> Thanks
>
> ==== CUT HERE ====
> mm: memory hotplug: Check if pages are correctly reserved on a per-section basis
>
> It is expected that memory being brought online is PageReserved
> similar to what happens when the page allocator is being brought up.
> Memory is onlined in "memory blocks" which consist of one or more
> sections. Unfortunately, the code that verifies PageReserved is
> currently assuming that the memmap backing all these pages is virtually
> contiguous which is only the case when CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP is set.
> As a result, memory hot-add is failing on those configurations with
> the message;
>
> kernel: section number XXX page number 256 not reserved, was it already online?
>
> This patch updates the PageReserved check to lookup struct page once
> per section to guarantee the correct struct page is being checked.
>
> [Check pages within sections properly: rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx]
> [original patch by: nfont@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Signed-off-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/base/memory.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> 1 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/memory.c b/drivers/base/memory.c
> index 2840ed4..ffb69cd 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/memory.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/memory.c
> @@ -224,13 +224,48 @@ int memory_isolate_notify(unsigned long val, void *v)
> }
>
> /*
> + * The probe routines leave the pages reserved, just as the bootmem code does.
> + * Make sure they're still that way.
> + */
> +static bool pages_correctly_reserved(unsigned long start_pfn,
> + unsigned long nr_pages)
> +{
> + int i, j;
> + struct page *page;
> + unsigned long pfn = start_pfn;
> +
> + /*
> + * memmap between sections is not contiguous except with
> + * SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP. We lookup the page once per section
> + * and assume memmap is contiguous within each section
> + */
> + for (i = 0; i < sections_per_block; i++, pfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION) {
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!pfn_valid(pfn)))
> + return false;
> + page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
> +
> + for (j = 0; j < PAGES_PER_SECTION; j++) {
> + if (PageReserved(page + j))
> + continue;
> +
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "section number %ld page number %d "
> + "not reserved, was it already online?\n",
> + pfn_to_section_nr(pfn), j);
> +
> + return false;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> * MEMORY_HOTPLUG depends on SPARSEMEM in mm/Kconfig, so it is
> * OK to have direct references to sparsemem variables in here.
> */
> static int
> memory_block_action(unsigned long phys_index, unsigned long action)
> {
> - int i;
> unsigned long start_pfn, start_paddr;
> unsigned long nr_pages = PAGES_PER_SECTION * sections_per_block;
> struct page *first_page;
> @@ -238,26 +273,13 @@ memory_block_action(unsigned long phys_index, unsigned long action)
>
> first_page = pfn_to_page(phys_index << PFN_SECTION_SHIFT);
>
> - /*
> - * The probe routines leave the pages reserved, just
> - * as the bootmem code does. Make sure they're still
> - * that way.
> - */
> - if (action == MEM_ONLINE) {
> - for (i = 0; i < nr_pages; i++) {
> - if (PageReserved(first_page+i))
> - continue;
> -
> - printk(KERN_WARNING "section number %ld page number %d "
> - "not reserved, was it already online?\n",
> - phys_index, i);
> - return -EBUSY;
> - }
> - }
> -
> switch (action) {
> case MEM_ONLINE:
> start_pfn = page_to_pfn(first_page);
> +
> + if (!pages_correctly_reserved(start_pfn, nr_pages))
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
> ret = online_pages(start_pfn, nr_pages);
> break;
> case MEM_OFFLINE:
>
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href