Thread (32 messages) 32 messages, 5 authors, 2011-06-09

Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 36192] New: Kernel panic when boot the 2.6.39+ kernel based off of 2.6.32 kernel

From: Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>
Date: 2011-06-07 08:37:11

On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 02:54:21PM +0200, Johannes Weiner wrote:
Cc Mel for memory model

On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 05:51:40PM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
quoted
On Mon, 30 May 2011 16:54:53 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Mon, 30 May 2011 16:29:04 +0900
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
SRAT: Node 1 PXM 1 0-a0000
SRAT: Node 1 PXM 1 100000-c8000000
SRAT: Node 1 PXM 1 100000000-438000000
SRAT: Node 3 PXM 3 438000000-838000000
SRAT: Node 5 PXM 5 838000000-c38000000
SRAT: Node 7 PXM 7 c38000000-1038000000

Initmem setup node 1 0000000000000000-0000000438000000
  NODE_DATA [0000000437fd9000 - 0000000437ffffff]
Initmem setup node 3 0000000438000000-0000000838000000
  NODE_DATA [0000000837fd9000 - 0000000837ffffff]
Initmem setup node 5 0000000838000000-0000000c38000000
  NODE_DATA [0000000c37fd9000 - 0000000c37ffffff]
Initmem setup node 7 0000000c38000000-0000001038000000
  NODE_DATA [0000001037fd7000 - 0000001037ffdfff]
[ffffea000ec40000-ffffea000edfffff] potential offnode page_structs
[ffffea001cc40000-ffffea001cdfffff] potential offnode page_structs
[ffffea002ac40000-ffffea002adfffff] potential offnode page_structs
==

Hmm..there are four nodes 1,3,5,7 but....no memory on node 0 hmm ?
I think I found a reason and this is a possible fix. But need to be tested.
And suggestion for better fix rather than this band-aid is appreciated.

==
quoted
From b95edcf43619312f72895476c3e6ef46079bb05f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <redacted>
Date: Mon, 30 May 2011 16:49:59 +0900
Subject: [PATCH][BUGFIX] fallbacks at page_cgroup allocation.

Under SPARSEMEM, the page_struct is allocated per section.
Then, pfn_valid() for the whole section is "true" and there are page
structs. But, it's not related to valid range of [start_pfn, end_pfn)
and some page structs may not be initialized collectly because
it's not a valid pages.
(memmap_init_zone() skips a page which is not correct in
 early_node_map[] and page->flags is initialized to be 0.)

In this case, a page->flags can be '0'. Assume a case where
node 0 has no memory....

page_cgroup is allocated onto the node

   - page_to_nid(head of section pfn)

Head's pfn will be valid (struct page exists) but page->flags is 0 and contains
node_id:0. This causes allocation onto NODE_DATA(0) and cause panic.

This patch makes page_cgroup to use alloc_pages_exact() only
when NID is N_NORMAL_MEMORY.
I don't like this much as it essentially will allocate the array from
a (semantically) random node, as long as it has memory.
Agreed. It means on some configurations the struct pages will be
node-local and on others will be node-remote depending on whether
the node starts are section-aligned or not. That will be difficult to
detect so minimally it would spit out a big warning when the struct
pages are allocated on remote nodes.
IMO, the problem is either 1) looking at PFNs outside known node
ranges, or 2) having present/valid sections partially outside of node
ranges. 
I am leaning towards 2), so I am wondering about the
following fix:
I strongly suspect it's 1 :)

While sections have valid (albeit potentially uninitialised) struct
pages outside node boundaries, within the node boundaries the
page-to-nid mapping is always valid.
---
From: Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>
Subject: [patch] sparse: only mark sections present when fully covered by memory

When valid memory ranges are to be registered with sparsemem, make
sure that only fully covered sections are marked as present.
This potentially wastes a lot of memory on architectures with large
sections.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Otherwise we end up with PFN ranges that are reported present and
valid but are actually backed by uninitialized mem map.

The page_cgroup allocator relies on pfn_present() being reliable for
all PFNs between 0 and max_pfn, then retrieve the node id stored in
the corresponding page->flags to allocate the per-section page_cgroup
arrays on the local node.

This lead to at least one crash in the page allocator on a system
where the uninitialized page struct returned the id for node 0, which
had no memory itself.

Reported-by: qcui@redhat.com
Debugged-by: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki [off-list ref]
Not-Yet-Signed-off-by: Johannes Weiner [off-list ref]
---
diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c
index aa64b12..a4fbeb8 100644
--- a/mm/sparse.c
+++ b/mm/sparse.c
@@ -182,7 +182,9 @@ void __init memory_present(int nid, unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
 {
 	unsigned long pfn;
 
-	start &= PAGE_SECTION_MASK;
+	start = ALIGN(start, PAGES_PER_SECTION);
+	end &= PAGE_SECTION_MASK;
+
 	mminit_validate_memmodel_limits(&start, &end);
 	for (pfn = start; pfn < end; pfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION) {
 		unsigned long section = pfn_to_section_nr(pfn);
I'm afraid I do not like this because of the potential memory wastage.

I think the real problem is that the page cgroup allocator expects that
sections are fully populated. Look at this place for example

int __meminit online_page_cgroup(unsigned long start_pfn,
                        unsigned long nr_pages,
                        int nid)
{
        unsigned long start, end, pfn;
        int fail = 0;

        start = start_pfn & ~(PAGES_PER_SECTION - 1);
        end = ALIGN(start_pfn + nr_pages, PAGES_PER_SECTION);

        for (pfn = start; !fail && pfn < end; pfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION) {
                if (!pfn_present(pfn))
                        continue;
                fail = init_section_page_cgroup(pfn);
        }
        if (!fail)

That is fully expecting aligned sections and there is no guarantee of
that.

During this walk, you also need to verify that the struct page is for a
node that you expect with something like

       for (pfn = start; !fail && pfn < end; pfn += PAGES_PER_SECTION) {
                if (!pfn_present(pfn))
                        continue;
		/* Watch for overlapping or unaligned nodes */
		if (page_to_nid(pfn_to_page(pfn)) != nid)
			continue;
                fail = init_section_page_cgroup(pfn);
        }


-- 
Mel Gorman
SUSE Labs

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help