Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 14 Sep 2012 20:00:09 +0900 | From | Yasuaki Ishimatsu <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESEND] memory hotplug: fix a double register section info bug |
| |
HiXishi,
2012/09/14 12:43, 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 > > 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@huawei.com> > Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@huawei.com> > --- > 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))
I cannot judge whether your configuration is correct or not. Thus if it is correct, I want a comment of why the node check is needed. In usual configuration, a node does not span the other one. So it is natural that "pfn_to_nid(pfn) is same as "pgdat->node_id". Thus we may remove the node check in the future.
Thanks, Yasuaki Ishimatsu
> + register_page_bootmem_info_section(pfn); > + } > } > #endif /* !CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP */ >
| |