lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/6] Have x86_64 use add_active_range() and free_area_init_nodes
Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2006, Mika Penttilä wrote:
>
>>
>>>>> static __init inline int srat_disabled(void)
>>>>> @@ -166,7 +167,7 @@ static int hotadd_enough_memory(struct b
>>>>>
>>>>> if (mem < 0)
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> - allowed = (end_pfn - e820_hole_size(0, end_pfn)) * PAGE_SIZE;
>>>>> + allowed = (end_pfn - absent_pages_in_range(0, end_pfn)) *
>>>>> PAGE_SIZE;
>>>>> allowed = (allowed / 100) * hotadd_percent;
>>>>> if (allocated + mem > allowed) {
>>>>> unsigned long range;
>>>>> @@ -238,7 +239,7 @@ static int reserve_hotadd(int node, unsi
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> /* This check might be a bit too strict, but I'm keeping it
>>>>> for now. */
>>>>> - if (e820_hole_size(s_pfn, e_pfn) != e_pfn - s_pfn) {
>>>>> + if (absent_pages_in_range(s_pfn, e_pfn) != e_pfn - s_pfn) {
>>>>> printk(KERN_ERR "SRAT: Hotplug area has existing
>>>>> memory\n");
>>>>> return -1;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>> We really do want to to compare against the e820 map at it contains
>>>> the memory that is really present (this info was blown away before
>>>> acpi_numa)
>>>
>>> The information used by absent_pages_in_range() should match what was
>>> available to e820_hole_size().
>>>
>>>
>> But it doesn't : all active ranges are removed before parsing srat. I
>> think we really need to check against e820 here.
>>
>
> What I see happening is this;
>
> 1. setup_arch calls e820_register_active_regions(0, 0, -1UL) so that all
> regions are registered as if they were on node 0 so e820_end_of_ram()
> gets the right value
> 2. remove_all_active_regions() is called to clear what was registered so
> that rediscovery with NUMA awareness happens
> 3. acpi_numa_init() is called. It parses the table and a little later
> calls acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init() for each range in the table so
> now we're into x86_64 code
> 4. acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init() basically deals an address range.
> Assuming the SRAT table is not broken, it calls
> e820_register_active_ranges() for that range. At this point, for the
> range of addresses, the active ranges are now registered
> 5. reserve_hotadd is called if the range is hotpluggable. It will fail if
> it finds that memory already exists there
>
> So, when absent_pages_in_range() is being called by reserve_hotadd(),
> it should be using the same information that was available in e820.
> What am I missing?
>
Ok, right, missed the e820_register_active_ranges() in
acpi_numa_memory_affinity_init() before reserve_hotadd stuff. So
logically it should be working mod bugs.

Argh, just looked through the reserve hotadd code and
hotadd_enough_memory() looks still broken. And why are we doing
reserve_bootmem_node(), the regions aren't present RAM anyways?

--Mika

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-08-31 19:43    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans