[PATCH 2/2] mm: hugetlb: support gigantic surplus pages
From: Huang Shijie <hidden>
Date: 2016-11-09 07:12:53
Also in:
linux-mm
On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 08:27:42PM +0100, Gerald Schaefer wrote:
On Tue, 8 Nov 2016 17:17:28 +0800 Huang Shijie [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
quoted
I will look at the lockdep issue.I tested the new patch (will be sent out later) on the arm64 platform, and I did not meet the lockdep issue when I enabled the lockdep. The following is my config: CONFIG_LOCKD=y CONFIG_LOCKD_V4=y CONFIG_LOCKUP_DETECTOR=y # CONFIG_BOOTPARAM_SOFTLOCKUP_PANIC is not set CONFIG_BOOTPARAM_SOFTLOCKUP_PANIC_VALUE=0 CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK=y CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC=y CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING=y CONFIG_LOCKDEP=y CONFIG_LOCK_STAT=y CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKDEP=y CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKING_API_SELFTESTS=y So do I miss something?Those options should be OK. Meanwhile I looked into this a little more, and the problematic line/lock is spin_lock_irqsave(&z->lock, flags) at the top of alloc_gigantic_page(). From the lockdep trace we see that it is triggered by an mmap(), and then hugetlb_acct_memory() -> __alloc_huge_page() -> alloc_gigantic_page(). However, in between those functions (inside gather_surplus_pages()) a NUMA_NO_NODE node id comes into play. And this finally results in alloc_gigantic_page() being called with NUMA_NO_NODE as nid (which is -1), and NODE_DATA(nid)->node_zones will then reach into Nirvana.
Thanks for pointing this. I sent out the new patch just now. Could you please try it again? I added a NUMA_NO_NODE check in the alloc_gigantic_page(); thanks Huang Shijie