On 2015/4/20 11:29, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>
> On Mon, 20 Apr 2015 10:45:45 +0800
> Xishi Qiu <qiuxi...@huawei.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2015/4/20 9:42, Gu Zheng wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Xishi,
>>> On 04/18/2015 04:05 AM, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Your patches will fix your issue.
>>>> But, if BIOS reports memory first at node hot add, pgdat can
>>>> not be initialized.
>>>>
>>>> Memory hot add flows are as follows:
>>>>
>>>> add_memory
>>>> ...
>>>> -> hotadd_new_pgdat()
>>>> ...
>>>> -> node_set_online(nid)
>>>>
>>>> When calling hotadd_new_pgdat() for a hot added node, the node is
>>>> offline because node_set_online() is not called yet. So if applying
>>>> your patches, the pgdat is not initialized in this case.
>>>
>>> Ishimtasu's worry is reasonable. And I am afraid the fix here is a bit
>>> over-kill.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 17 Apr 2015 18:50:32 +0800
>>>> Xishi Qiu <qiuxi...@huawei.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hot remove nodeXX, then hot add nodeXX. If BIOS report cpu first, it will
>>>>> call
>>>>> hotadd_new_pgdat(nid, 0), this will set pgdat->node_start_pfn to 0. As
>>>>> nodeXX
>>>>> exists at boot time, so pgdat->node_spanned_pages is the same as
>>>>> original. Then
>>>>> free_area_init_core()->memmap_init() will pass a wrong start and a
>>>>> nonzero size.
>>>
>>> As your analysis said the root cause here is passing a *0* as the
>>> node_start_pfn,
>>> then the chaos occurred when init the zones. And this only happens to the
>>> re-hotadd
>>> node, so how about using the saved *node_start_pfn* (via
>>> get_pfn_range_for_nid(nid, &start_pfn, &end_pfn))
>>> instead if we find "pgdat->node_start_pfn == 0 && !node_online(XXX)"?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Gu
>>>
>>
>> Hi Gu,
>>
>> I first considered this method, but if the hot added node's start and size
>> are different
>> from before, it makes the chaos.
>>
>
>> e.g.
>> nodeXX (8-16G)
>> remove nodeXX
>> BIOS report cpu first and online it
>> hotadd nodeXX
>> use the original value, so pgdat->node_start_pfn is set to 8G, and size is 8G
>> BIOS report mem(10-12G)
>> call add_memory()->__add_zone()->grow_zone_span()/grow_pgdat_span()
>> the start is still 8G, not 10G, this is chaos!
>
> If you set CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP, kernel shows the following
> pr_info()'s message.
>
> void __paginginit free_area_init_node(int nid, unsigned long *zones_size,
> unsigned long node_start_pfn, unsigned long *zholes_size)
> {
> ...
> #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_MEMBLOCK_NODE_MAP
> get_pfn_range_for_nid(nid, &start_pfn, &end_pfn);
> pr_info("Initmem setup node %d [mem %#018Lx-%#018Lx]\n", nid,
> (u64)start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT, ((u64)end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT) -
> 1);
> #endif
> }
>
> Is the memory range of the message "8G - 16G"?
> If so, the reason is that memblk is not deleted at memory hot remove.
>
> Thanks,
> Yasuaki Ishimatsu
>
Hi Yasuaki,
By reading the code, I find memblk is not deleted at memory hot remove.
I am not sure whether we should remove it. If remove it, we should also reset
"arch_zone_lowest_possible_pfn", right? It seems a little complicated.
Thanks,
Xishi Qiu
>
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Xishi Qiu
>>
>
> .
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
