lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3] arm64: mm: Fix NOMAP page initialization
From
Date
On 2017/1/5 10:03, Hanjun Guo wrote:
> On 2017/1/4 21:56, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>> On 16 December 2016 at 16:54, Robert Richter <rrichter@cavium.com> wrote:
>>> On ThunderX systems with certain memory configurations we see the
>>> following BUG_ON():
>>>
>>> kernel BUG at mm/page_alloc.c:1848!
>>>
>>> This happens for some configs with 64k page size enabled. The BUG_ON()
>>> checks if start and end page of a memmap range belongs to the same
>>> zone.
>>>
>>> The BUG_ON() check fails if a memory zone contains NOMAP regions. In
>>> this case the node information of those pages is not initialized. This
>>> causes an inconsistency of the page links with wrong zone and node
>>> information for that pages. NOMAP pages from node 1 still point to the
>>> mem zone from node 0 and have the wrong nid assigned.
>>>
>>> The reason for the mis-configuration is a change in pfn_valid() which
>>> reports pages marked NOMAP as invalid:
>>>
>>> 68709f45385a arm64: only consider memblocks with NOMAP cleared for
>>> linear mapping
>>>
>>> This causes pages marked as nomap being no longer reassigned to the
>>> new zone in memmap_init_zone() by calling __init_single_pfn().
>>>
>>> Fixing this by implementing an arm64 specific early_pfn_valid(). This
>>> causes all pages of sections with memory including NOMAP ranges to be
>>> initialized by __init_single_page() and ensures consistency of page
>>> links to zone, node and section.
>>>
>>
>> I like this solution a lot better than the first one, but I am still
>> somewhat uneasy about having the kernel reason about attributes of
>> pages it should not touch in the first place. But the fact that
>> early_pfn_valid() is only used a single time in the whole kernel does
>> give some confidence that we are not simply moving the problem
>> elsewhere.
>>
>> Given that you are touching arch/arm/ as well as arch/arm64, could you
>> explain why only arm64 needs this treatment? Is it simply because we
>> don't have NUMA support there?
>>
>> Considering that Hisilicon D05 suffered from the same issue, I would
>> like to get some coverage there as well. Hanjun, is this something you
>> can arrange? Thanks
>
> Sure, we will test this patch with LTP MM stress test (which triggers
> the bug on D05), and give the feedback.

a update here, tested on 4.9,

- Applied Ard's two patches only
- Applied Robert's patch only

Both of them can work fine on D05 with NUMA enabled, which means
boot ok and LTP MM stress test is passed.

I'm not familiar with memory management, it's up to you guys to make
a decision :)

Thanks
Hanjun

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-01-06 02:07    [W:0.202 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site