On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 11:43:27AM +0800, qiuxishi wrote:
> There may be a bug when registering section info. For example, on
> my Itanium platform, the pfn range of node0 includes the other nodes,
> so other nodes' section info will be double registered, and memmap's
> page count will equal to 3.
>
> node0: start_pfn=0x100, spanned_pfn=0x20fb00, present_pfn=0x7f8a3, => 0x000100-0x20fc00
> node1: start_pfn=0x80000, spanned_pfn=0x80000, present_pfn=0x80000, => 0x080000-0x100000
> node2: start_pfn=0x100000, spanned_pfn=0x80000, present_pfn=0x80000, => 0x100000-0x180000
> node3: start_pfn=0x180000, spanned_pfn=0x80000, present_pfn=0x80000, => 0x180000-0x200000
>
This is an unusual configuration but it's not unheard of. PPC64 in rare
(and usually broken) configurations can have one node span another. Tony
should know if such a configuration is normally allowed on Itanium or if
this should be considered a platform bug. Tony?
> free_all_bootmem_node()
> register_page_bootmem_info_node()
> register_page_bootmem_info_section()
>
> When hot remove memory, we can't free the memmap's page because
> page_count() is 2 after put_page_bootmem().
>
> sparse_remove_one_section()
> free_section_usemap()
> free_map_bootmem()
> put_page_bootmem()
>
> Signed-off-by: Xishi Qiu <qiuxishi@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> mm/memory_hotplug.c | 10 ++++------
> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> index 2adbcac..cf493c7 100644
> --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> @@ -126,9 +126,6 @@ static void register_page_bootmem_info_section(unsigned long start_pfn)
> struct mem_section *ms;
> struct page *page, *memmap;
>
> - if (!pfn_valid(start_pfn))
> - return;
> -
> section_nr = pfn_to_section_nr(start_pfn);
> ms = __nr_to_section(section_nr);
>
> @@ -187,9 +184,10 @@ void register_page_bootmem_info_node(struct pglist_data *pgdat)
> end_pfn = pfn + pgdat->node_spanned_pages;
>
> /* register_section info */
> - for (; pfn < end_pfn; pfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION)
> - register_page_bootmem_info_section(pfn);
> -
> + for (; pfn < end_pfn; pfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION) {
> + if (pfn_valid(pfn) && (pfn_to_nid(pfn) == node))
> + register_page_bootmem_info_section(pfn);
> + }
Functionally what the patch does is check if the PFN is both valid *and*
belongs to the expected node to catch a situation where nodes overlap. As
there are no other callers of register_page_bootmem_info_section() this
patch seems reasonable to me so
Acked-by: Mel Gorman <mgorman@xxxxxxx>
I think it would also be ok to consider this a -stable candidate.
> }
> #endif /* !CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP */
>
> --
> 1.7.1
--
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs
--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>