On 2023/7/20 9:09, Naoya Horiguchi wrote: > On Sat, Jul 15, 2023 at 11:17:29AM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote: >> Memory failure is not interested in logically offlined page. Skip this >> type of pages. >> >> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> mm/memory-failure.c | 5 +++-- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c >> index 42e63b0ab5f7..ed79b69837de 100644 >> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c >> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c >> @@ -1559,7 +1559,7 @@ static bool hwpoison_user_mappings(struct page *p, unsigned long pfn, >> * Here we are interested only in user-mapped pages, so skip any >> * other types of pages. >> */ >> - if (PageReserved(p) || PageSlab(p) || PageTable(p)) >> + if (PageReserved(p) || PageSlab(p) || PageTable(p) || PageOffline(p)) > > hwpoison_user_mappings() is called after some checks are done, so I'm not > sure that it's the right place to check PageOffline(). hwpoison_user_mappings() is called after the "if (!PageLRU(p) && !PageWriteback(p))" check in memory_failure(). So the page can't also be PageReserved(p) or PageSlab(p) or PageTable(p) here? I think the check here just wants to make things clear that only user-mapped pages are interested. Or am I miss something? Thanks Naoya.
