Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
On 11/20/2012 02:55 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/20/2012 02:22 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But
even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
In order to review this patch, I should dig sparse memory codes in
advance. But I have some confuse of codes. Why need encode/decode mem
map instead of set mem_map to ms-section_mem_map directly?
The memmap is aligned, and the low bits are zero. We store some information
in these bits. So we need to encode/decode memmap here.
Hi Congyang,
Thanks for you reponse. But I mean why return (unsigned long)(mem_map -
(section_nr_to_pfn(pnum))); in function sparse_encode_mem_map, and then
return ((struct page *)coded_mem_map) + section_nr_to_pfn(pnum); in
funtion sparse_decode_mem_map instead of just store mem_map in
ms-section_mep_map directly.
Regards,
Jaegeuk
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid,
struct zone *zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
{
-/*
- * XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
- * This should be removed later.
- */
-return -EBUSY;
+int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+if (!valid_section(ms))
+return ret;
+
+ret = unregister_memory_section(ms);
+
+return ret;
}
#else
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
At 11/20/2012 02:58 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/20/2012 02:55 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/20/2012 02:22 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But
even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
In order to review this patch, I should dig sparse memory codes in
advance. But I have some confuse of codes. Why need encode/decode mem
map instead of set mem_map to ms-section_mem_map directly?
The memmap is aligned, and the low bits are zero. We store some
information
in these bits. So we need to encode/decode memmap here.
Hi Congyang,
Thanks for you reponse. But I mean why return (unsigned long)(mem_map -
(section_nr_to_pfn(pnum))); in function sparse_encode_mem_map, and then
return ((struct page *)coded_mem_map) + section_nr_to_pfn(pnum); in
funtion sparse_decode_mem_map instead of just store mem_map in
ms-section_mep_map directly.
I don't know why. I try to find the reason, but I don't find any
place to use the pfn stored in the mem_map except in the decode
function. Maybe the designer doesn't want us to access the mem_map
directly.
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid,
struct zone *zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section
*ms)
{
-/*
- * XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
- * This should be removed later.
- */
-return -EBUSY;
+int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+if (!valid_section(ms))
+return ret;
+
+ret = unregister_memory_section(ms);
+
+return ret;
}
#else
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section
*ms)
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
On 11/20/2012 05:37 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/20/2012 02:58 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/20/2012 02:55 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/20/2012 02:22 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But
even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
In order to review this patch, I should dig sparse memory codes in
advance. But I have some confuse of codes. Why need encode/decode mem
map instead of set mem_map to ms-section_mem_map directly?
The memmap is aligned, and the low bits are zero. We store some
information
in these bits. So we need to encode/decode memmap here.
Hi Congyang,
Thanks for you reponse. But I mean why return (unsigned long)(mem_map -
(section_nr_to_pfn(pnum))); in function sparse_encode_mem_map, and then
return ((struct page *)coded_mem_map) + section_nr_to_pfn(pnum); in
funtion sparse_decode_mem_map instead of just store mem_map in
ms-section_mep_map directly.
I don't know why. I try to find the reason, but I don't find any
place to use the pfn stored in the mem_map except in the decode
function. Maybe the designer doesn't want us to access the mem_map
directly.
It seems that mem_map is per node, but pfn is real pfn.
you can check __page_to_pfn.
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid,
struct zone *zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section
*ms)
{
-/*
- * XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
- * This should be removed later.
- */
-return -EBUSY;
+int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+if (!valid_section(ms))
+return ret;
+
+ret = unregister_memory_section(ms);
+
+return ret;
}
#else
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section
*ms)
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
I have a question about these sparse vmemmap memory related patches. Hot
add memory need allocated vmemmap pages, but this time is allocated by
buddy system. How can gurantee virtual address is continuous to the
address allocated before? If not continuous, page_to_pfn and pfn_to_page
can't work correctly.
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid, struct zone
*zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
{
- /*
-* XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
-* This should be removed later.
-*/
- return -EBUSY;
+ int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+ if (!valid_section(ms))
+ return ret;
+
+ ret = unregister_memory_section(ms);
+
+ return ret;
}
#else
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
At 11/20/2012 07:16 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But
even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
I have a question about these sparse vmemmap memory related patches. Hot
add memory need allocated vmemmap pages, but this time is allocated by
buddy system. How can gurantee virtual address is continuous to the
address allocated before? If not continuous, page_to_pfn and pfn_to_page
can't work correctly.
vmemmap has its virtual address range:
ea00 - eaff (=40 bits) virtual memory map (1TB)
We allocate memory from buddy system to store struct page, and its virtual
address isn't in this range. So we should update the page table:
kmalloc_section_memmap()
sparse_mem_map_populate()
pfn_to_page() // get the virtual address in the vmemmap range
vmemmap_populate() // we update page table here
When we use vmemmap, page_to_pfn() always returns address in the vmemmap
range, not the address that kmalloc() returns. So the virtual address
is continuous.
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid,
struct zone *zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
{
-/*
- * XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
- * This should be removed later.
- */
-return -EBUSY;
+int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+if (!valid_section(ms))
+return ret;
+
+ret = unregister_memory_section(ms);
+
+return ret;
}
#else
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
On 11/21/2012 11:05 AM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/20/2012 07:16 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But
even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
I have a question about these sparse vmemmap memory related patches. Hot
add memory need allocated vmemmap pages, but this time is allocated by
buddy system. How can gurantee virtual address is continuous to the
address allocated before? If not continuous, page_to_pfn and pfn_to_page
can't work correctly.
vmemmap has its virtual address range:
ea00 - eaff (=40 bits) virtual memory map (1TB)
We allocate memory from buddy system to store struct page, and its virtual
address isn't in this range. So we should update the page table:
kmalloc_section_memmap()
sparse_mem_map_populate()
pfn_to_page() // get the virtual address in the vmemmap range
vmemmap_populate() // we update page table here
When we use vmemmap, page_to_pfn() always returns address in the vmemmap
range, not the address that kmalloc() returns. So the virtual address
is continuous.
Hi Congyang,
Another question about memory hotplug. During hot remove memory, it will
also call memblock_remove to remove related memblock.
memblock_remove()
__memblock_remove()
memblock_isolate_range()
memblock_remove_region()
But memblock_isolate_range() only record fully contained regions,
regions which are partial overlapped just be splitted instead of record.
So these partial overlapped regions can't be removed. Where I miss?
Regards,
Jaegeuk
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid,
struct zone *zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
{
-/*
- * XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
- * This should be removed later.
- */
-return -EBUSY;
+int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+if (!valid_section(ms))
+return ret;
+
+ret = unregister_memory_section(ms);
+
+return ret;
}
#else
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
At 11/21/2012 12:22 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/21/2012 11:05 AM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/20/2012 07:16 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But
even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
I have a question about these sparse vmemmap memory related patches. Hot
add memory need allocated vmemmap pages, but this time is allocated by
buddy system. How can gurantee virtual address is continuous to the
address allocated before? If not continuous, page_to_pfn and pfn_to_page
can't work correctly.
vmemmap has its virtual address range:
ea00 - eaff (=40 bits) virtual memory map (1TB)
We allocate memory from buddy system to store struct page, and its
virtual
address isn't in this range. So we should update the page table:
kmalloc_section_memmap()
sparse_mem_map_populate()
pfn_to_page() // get the virtual address in the vmemmap range
vmemmap_populate() // we update page table here
When we use vmemmap, page_to_pfn() always returns address in the vmemmap
range, not the address that kmalloc() returns. So the virtual address
is continuous.
Hi Congyang,
Another question about memory hotplug. During hot remove memory, it will
also call memblock_remove to remove related memblock.
IIRC, we don't touch memblock when hot-add/hot-remove memory. memblock is
only used for bootmem allocator. I think it isn't used after booting.
memblock_remove()
__memblock_remove()
memblock_isolate_range()
memblock_remove_region()
But memblock_isolate_range() only record fully contained regions,
regions which are partial overlapped just be splitted instead of record.
So these partial overlapped regions can't be removed. Where I miss?
No, memblock_isolate_range() can deal with partial overlapped region.
=
if (rbase base) {
/*
* @rgn intersects from below. Split and continue
* to process the next region - the new top half.
*/
rgn-base = base;
rgn-size -= base - rbase;
type-total_size -= base - rbase;
memblock_insert_region(type, i, rbase, base - rbase,
memblock_get_region_node(rgn));
} else if (rend end) {
/*
* @rgn intersects from above. Split and redo the
* current region - the new bottom half.
*/
rgn-base = end;
rgn-size -= end - rbase;
type-total_size -= end - rbase;
memblock_insert_region(type, i--, rbase, end - rbase,
memblock_get_region_node(rgn));
=
If the region is partial overlapped region, we will split the old region into
two regions. After doing this, it is full contained region now.
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid,
struct zone *zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section
*ms)
{
-/*
- * XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
- * This should be removed later.
- */
-return -EBUSY;
+int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+if (!valid_section(ms))
+return ret;
+
+ret = unregister_memory_section(ms);
+
+return ret;
}
#else
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section
*ms)
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
On 11/21/2012 12:42 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:22 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/21/2012 11:05 AM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/20/2012 07:16 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But
even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
I have a question about these sparse vmemmap memory related patches. Hot
add memory need allocated vmemmap pages, but this time is allocated by
buddy system. How can gurantee virtual address is continuous to the
address allocated before? If not continuous, page_to_pfn and pfn_to_page
can't work correctly.
vmemmap has its virtual address range:
ea00 - eaff (=40 bits) virtual memory map (1TB)
We allocate memory from buddy system to store struct page, and its
virtual
address isn't in this range. So we should update the page table:
kmalloc_section_memmap()
sparse_mem_map_populate()
pfn_to_page() // get the virtual address in the vmemmap range
vmemmap_populate() // we update page table here
When we use vmemmap, page_to_pfn() always returns address in the vmemmap
range, not the address that kmalloc() returns. So the virtual address
is continuous.
Hi Congyang,
Another question about memory hotplug. During hot remove memory, it will
also call memblock_remove to remove related memblock.
IIRC, we don't touch memblock when hot-add/hot-remove memory. memblock is
only used for bootmem allocator. I think it isn't used after booting.
In IBM pseries servers.
pseries_remove_memory()
pseries_remove_memblock()
memblock_remove()
Furthermore, memblock is set to record available memory ranges get from
e820 map(you can check it in memblock_x86_fill()) in x86 case, after
hot-remove memory, this range of memory can't be available, why not
remove them as pseries servers' codes do.
memblock_remove()
__memblock_remove()memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on
SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
memblock_isolate_range()
memblock_remove_region()
But memblock_isolate_range() only record fully contained regions,
regions which are partial overlapped just be splitted instead of record.
So these partial overlapped regions can't be removed. Where I miss?
No, memblock_isolate_range() can deal with partial overlapped region.
=
if (rbase base) {
/*
* @rgn intersects from below. Split and continue
* to process the next region - the new top half.
*/
rgn-base = base;
rgn-size -= base - rbase;
type-total_size -= base - rbase;
memblock_insert_region(type, i, rbase, base - rbase,
memblock_get_region_node(rgn));
} else if (rend end) {
/*
* @rgn intersects from above. Split and redo the
* current region - the new bottom half.
*/
rgn-base = end;
rgn-size -= end - rbase;
type-total_size -= end - rbase;
memblock_insert_region(type, i--, rbase, end - rbase,
memblock_get_region_node(rgn));
=
If the region is partial overlapped region, we will split the old region into
two regions. After doing this, it is full contained region now.
You are right, I misunderstand the codes.
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid,
struct zone *zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section
*ms)
{
-/*
- * XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
- * This should be removed later.
- */
-return -EBUSY;
+int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+if (!valid_section(ms))
+return ret;
+
+ret =
Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
At 11/21/2012 01:03 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/21/2012 12:42 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:22 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/21/2012 11:05 AM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/20/2012 07:16 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But
even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
I have a question about these sparse vmemmap memory related
patches. Hot
add memory need allocated vmemmap pages, but this time is allocated by
buddy system. How can gurantee virtual address is continuous to the
address allocated before? If not continuous, page_to_pfn and
pfn_to_page
can't work correctly.
vmemmap has its virtual address range:
ea00 - eaff (=40 bits) virtual memory map (1TB)
We allocate memory from buddy system to store struct page, and its
virtual
address isn't in this range. So we should update the page table:
kmalloc_section_memmap()
sparse_mem_map_populate()
pfn_to_page() // get the virtual address in the vmemmap range
vmemmap_populate() // we update page table here
When we use vmemmap, page_to_pfn() always returns address in the
vmemmap
range, not the address that kmalloc() returns. So the virtual address
is continuous.
Hi Congyang,
Another question about memory hotplug. During hot remove memory, it will
also call memblock_remove to remove related memblock.
IIRC, we don't touch memblock when hot-add/hot-remove memory. memblock is
only used for bootmem allocator. I think it isn't used after booting.
In IBM pseries servers.
pseries_remove_memory()
pseries_remove_memblock()
memblock_remove()
Furthermore, memblock is set to record available memory ranges get from
e820 map(you can check it in memblock_x86_fill()) in x86 case, after
hot-remove memory, this range of memory can't be available, why not
remove them as pseries servers' codes do.
Oh, it is powerpc, and I don't read this code. I will check it now.
Thanks for pointing it out.
Wen Congyang
memblock_remove()
__memblock_remove()memory-hotplug: unregister memory
section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
memblock_isolate_range()
memblock_remove_region()
But memblock_isolate_range() only record fully contained regions,
regions which are partial overlapped just be splitted instead of record.
So these partial overlapped regions can't be removed. Where I miss?
No, memblock_isolate_range() can deal with partial overlapped region.
=
if (rbase base) {
/*
* @rgn intersects from below. Split and continue
* to process the next region - the new top half.
*/
rgn-base = base;
rgn-size -= base - rbase;
type-total_size -= base - rbase;
memblock_insert_region(type, i, rbase, base - rbase,
memblock_get_region_node(rgn));
} else if (rend end) {
/*
* @rgn intersects from above. Split and redo the
* current region - the new bottom half.
*/
rgn-base = end;
rgn-size -= end - rbase;
type-total_size -= end - rbase;
memblock_insert_region(type, i--, rbase, end - rbase,
memblock_get_region_node(rgn));
=
If the region is partial overlapped region, we will split the old
region into
two regions. After doing this, it is full contained region now.
You are right, I misunderstand the codes.
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid,
struct zone *zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section
*ms)
{
-/*
- * XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
- * This should be removed later.
- */
-return -EBUSY;
+int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+if (!valid_section(ms))
+return ret;
+
+
Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
At 11/21/2012 01:03 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/21/2012 12:42 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/21/2012 12:22 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/21/2012 11:05 AM, Wen Congyang wrote:
At 11/20/2012 07:16 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But
even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
I have a question about these sparse vmemmap memory related
patches. Hot
add memory need allocated vmemmap pages, but this time is allocated by
buddy system. How can gurantee virtual address is continuous to the
address allocated before? If not continuous, page_to_pfn and
pfn_to_page
can't work correctly.
vmemmap has its virtual address range:
ea00 - eaff (=40 bits) virtual memory map (1TB)
We allocate memory from buddy system to store struct page, and its
virtual
address isn't in this range. So we should update the page table:
kmalloc_section_memmap()
sparse_mem_map_populate()
pfn_to_page() // get the virtual address in the vmemmap range
vmemmap_populate() // we update page table here
When we use vmemmap, page_to_pfn() always returns address in the
vmemmap
range, not the address that kmalloc() returns. So the virtual address
is continuous.
Hi Congyang,
Another question about memory hotplug. During hot remove memory, it will
also call memblock_remove to remove related memblock.
IIRC, we don't touch memblock when hot-add/hot-remove memory. memblock is
only used for bootmem allocator. I think it isn't used after booting.
In IBM pseries servers.
pseries_remove_memory()
pseries_remove_memblock()
memblock_remove()
It seems that pseries servers don't use ACPI(ACPI is only supported for
ia64 and x86 now. arm will be supported in the furture).
I am not ppc expert, and I don't know why we touch memblock when hotadding
memory in ppc case. But IIRC, we don't need memblock after the machine has
booted up in x86 case. So there is no need to touch it when hotadd/hotremove
the memory in x86 case.
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Furthermore, memblock is set to record available memory ranges get from
e820 map(you can check it in memblock_x86_fill()) in x86 case, after
hot-remove memory, this range of memory can't be available, why not
remove them as pseries servers' codes do.
memblock_remove()
__memblock_remove()memory-hotplug: unregister memory
section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
memblock_isolate_range()
memblock_remove_region()
But memblock_isolate_range() only record fully contained regions,
regions which are partial overlapped just be splitted instead of record.
So these partial overlapped regions can't be removed. Where I miss?
No, memblock_isolate_range() can deal with partial overlapped region.
=
if (rbase base) {
/*
* @rgn intersects from below. Split and continue
* to process the next region - the new top half.
*/
rgn-base = base;
rgn-size -= base - rbase;
type-total_size -= base - rbase;
memblock_insert_region(type, i, rbase, base - rbase,
memblock_get_region_node(rgn));
} else if (rend end) {
/*
* @rgn intersects from above. Split and redo the
* current region - the new bottom half.
*/
rgn-base = end;
rgn-size -= end - rbase;
type-total_size -= end - rbase;
memblock_insert_region(type, i--, rbase, end - rbase,
memblock_get_region_node(rgn));
=
If the region is partial overlapped region, we will split the old
region into
two regions. After doing this, it is full contained region now.
You are right, I misunderstand the codes.
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid,
struct zone *zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int
Re: [PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
At 11/20/2012 02:22 PM, Jaegeuk Hanse Wrote:
On 11/01/2012 05:44 PM, Wen Congyang wrote:
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But
even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
Hi Yasuaki,
In order to review this patch, I should dig sparse memory codes in
advance. But I have some confuse of codes. Why need encode/decode mem
map instead of set mem_map to ms-section_mem_map directly?
The memmap is aligned, and the low bits are zero. We store some information
in these bits. So we need to encode/decode memmap here.
Thanks
Wen Congyang
Regards,
Jaegeuk
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid,
struct zone *zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
{
-/*
- * XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
- * This should be removed later.
- */
-return -EBUSY;
+int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+if (!valid_section(ms))
+return ret;
+
+ret = unregister_memory_section(ms);
+
+return ret;
}
#else
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
[PATCH v3 06/12] memory-hotplug: unregister memory section on SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
From: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
Currently __remove_section for SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP does nothing. But even if
we use SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, we can unregister the memory_section.
So the patch add unregister_memory_section() into __remove_section().
CC: David Rientjes rient...@google.com
CC: Jiang Liu liu...@gmail.com
CC: Len Brown len.br...@intel.com
CC: Christoph Lameter c...@linux.com
Cc: Minchan Kim minchan@gmail.com
CC: Andrew Morton a...@linux-foundation.org
CC: KOSAKI Motohiro kosaki.motoh...@jp.fujitsu.com
CC: Wen Congyang we...@cn.fujitsu.com
Signed-off-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu isimatu.yasu...@jp.fujitsu.com
---
mm/memory_hotplug.c | 13 -
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
index ca07433..66a79a7 100644
--- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
+++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
@@ -286,11 +286,14 @@ static int __meminit __add_section(int nid, struct zone
*zone,
#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
{
- /*
-* XXX: Freeing memmap with vmemmap is not implement yet.
-* This should be removed later.
-*/
- return -EBUSY;
+ int ret = -EINVAL;
+
+ if (!valid_section(ms))
+ return ret;
+
+ ret = unregister_memory_section(ms);
+
+ return ret;
}
#else
static int __remove_section(struct zone *zone, struct mem_section *ms)
--
1.8.0
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
