Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1621472 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH -v2 0/9] mm: make movable onlining suck less

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH -v2 0/9] mm: make movable onlining suck less Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-04-11 19:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH -v2 0/9] mm: make movable onlining suck less Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 00:00 +0200
      Re: [PATCH -v2 0/9] mm: make movable onlining suck less Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-04-18 09:20 +0200
        Re: [PATCH -v2 0/9] mm: make movable onlining suck less Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@gmail.com> - 2017-04-18 18:50 +0200
          Re: [PATCH -v2 0/9] mm: make movable onlining suck less Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> - 2017-04-18 22:00 +0200
            Re: [PATCH -v2 0/9] mm: make movable onlining suck less Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2017-04-20 05:40 +0200

#1621472 — Re: [PATCH -v2 0/9] mm: make movable onlining suck less

All the reported issue seem to be fixed and pushed to my git tree
attempts/rewrite-mem_hotplug branch. I will wait a day or two for more
feedback and then repost for the inclusion. I would really appreaciate
more testing/review!
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1624882

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> All the reported issue seem to be fixed and pushed to my git tree
> attempts/rewrite-mem_hotplug branch. I will wait a day or two for more
> feedback and then repost for the inclusion. I would really appreaciate
> more testing/review!

This still seems to be based on 4.10? It's missing some block-layer
fixes and other things that trigger failures in the nvdimm unit tests.
Can you rebase to a more recent 4.11-rc?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1625093

On Mon 17-04-17 14:51:12, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> > All the reported issue seem to be fixed and pushed to my git tree
> > attempts/rewrite-mem_hotplug branch. I will wait a day or two for more
> > feedback and then repost for the inclusion. I would really appreaciate
> > more testing/review!
> 
> This still seems to be based on 4.10? It's missing some block-layer
> fixes and other things that trigger failures in the nvdimm unit tests.
> Can you rebase to a more recent 4.11-rc?

OK, I will rebase on top of linux-next. This has been based on mmotm
tree so far. Btw. is there anything that would change the current
implementation other than small context tweaks? In other words, do you
see any issues with the current implementation regarding nvdimm's
ZONE_DEVICE usage?

Thanks!

-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1625439

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:14 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Mon 17-04-17 14:51:12, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
>> > All the reported issue seem to be fixed and pushed to my git tree
>> > attempts/rewrite-mem_hotplug branch. I will wait a day or two for more
>> > feedback and then repost for the inclusion. I would really appreaciate
>> > more testing/review!
>>
>> This still seems to be based on 4.10? It's missing some block-layer
>> fixes and other things that trigger failures in the nvdimm unit tests.
>> Can you rebase to a more recent 4.11-rc?
>
> OK, I will rebase on top of linux-next. This has been based on mmotm
> tree so far. Btw. is there anything that would change the current
> implementation other than small context tweaks? In other words, do you
> see any issues with the current implementation regarding nvdimm's
> ZONE_DEVICE usage?

I don't foresee any issues, but I wanted to be able to run the latest
test suite to be sure.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1625592

On Tue 18-04-17 09:42:57, Dan Williams wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:14 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon 17-04-17 14:51:12, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> >> > All the reported issue seem to be fixed and pushed to my git tree
> >> > attempts/rewrite-mem_hotplug branch. I will wait a day or two for more
> >> > feedback and then repost for the inclusion. I would really appreaciate
> >> > more testing/review!
> >>
> >> This still seems to be based on 4.10? It's missing some block-layer
> >> fixes and other things that trigger failures in the nvdimm unit tests.
> >> Can you rebase to a more recent 4.11-rc?
> >
> > OK, I will rebase on top of linux-next. This has been based on mmotm
> > tree so far. Btw. is there anything that would change the current
> > implementation other than small context tweaks? In other words, do you
> > see any issues with the current implementation regarding nvdimm's
> > ZONE_DEVICE usage?
> 
> I don't foresee any issues, but I wanted to be able to run the latest
> test suite to be sure.

OK, the rebase on top of the current linux-next is in my git tree [1]
attempts/rewrite-mem_hotplug branch. I will post the full series
tomorrow hopefully.

[1] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mhocko/mm.git
-- 
Michal Hocko
SUSE Labs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1626954

On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Tue 18-04-17 09:42:57, Dan Williams wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:14 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
>> > On Mon 17-04-17 14:51:12, Dan Williams wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org> wrote:
>> >> > All the reported issue seem to be fixed and pushed to my git tree
>> >> > attempts/rewrite-mem_hotplug branch. I will wait a day or two for more
>> >> > feedback and then repost for the inclusion. I would really appreaciate
>> >> > more testing/review!
>> >>
>> >> This still seems to be based on 4.10? It's missing some block-layer
>> >> fixes and other things that trigger failures in the nvdimm unit tests.
>> >> Can you rebase to a more recent 4.11-rc?
>> >
>> > OK, I will rebase on top of linux-next. This has been based on mmotm
>> > tree so far. Btw. is there anything that would change the current
>> > implementation other than small context tweaks? In other words, do you
>> > see any issues with the current implementation regarding nvdimm's
>> > ZONE_DEVICE usage?
>>
>> I don't foresee any issues, but I wanted to be able to run the latest
>> test suite to be sure.
>
> OK, the rebase on top of the current linux-next is in my git tree [1]
> attempts/rewrite-mem_hotplug branch. I will post the full series
> tomorrow hopefully.
>
> [1] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mhocko/mm.git


I'm hitting the following with the "device-dax" unit test [1]. Does
not look like your changes, but I'm kicking off a bisect between
v4.11-rc7 and this branch tip.

[1]: https://github.com/pmem/ndctl/blob/master/test/device-dax.c

---

[  547.047430] BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at ffff880001000000
[  547.048954] IP: native_set_pte_at+0x1/0x10
[  547.049967] PGD 3197067
[  547.049968] P4D 3197067
[  547.050779] PUD 3198067
[  547.051589] PMD 33ff00067
[  547.052401] PTE 8000000001000161
[  547.053237]
[  547.054819] Oops: 0003 [#1] SMP DEBUG_PAGEALLOC
[  547.055907] Dumping ftrace buffer:
[  547.056864]    (ftrace buffer empty)
[  547.057815] Modules linked in: nd_blk(O) ip6t_rpfilter ip6t_REJECT
nf_reject_ipv6 xt_conntrack ebtable_nat ebtable_broute bridge stp llc
ip6table_nat nf_conntrack_ipv6 nf_defrag_ipv6 nf_n
at_ipv6 ip6table_mangle ip6table_raw ip6table_security iptable_nat
nf_conntrack_ipv4 nf_defrag_ipv4 nf_nat_ipv4 nf_nat nf_conntrack
iptable_mangle iptable_raw iptable_security ebtable_filter
 ebtables ip6table_filter ip6_tables crct10dif_pclmul crc32_pclmul
crc32c_intel ghash_clmulni_intel dax_pmem(O) nd_pmem(O) dax(O)
nd_btt(O) nfit(O) nd_e820(O) tpm_tis libnvdimm(O) serio_raw
tpm_tis_core tpm nfit_test_iomap(O) nfsd nfs_acl [last unloaded: nfit_test]
[  547.069034] CPU: 17 PID: 9526 Comm: lt-ndctl Tainted: G           O
   4.11.0-rc7-next-20170418+ #34
[  547.071122] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996),
BIOS 1.9.3-1.fc25 04/01/2014
[  547.073163] task: ffff880322f518c0 task.stack: ffffc90002f08000
[  547.074433] RIP: 0010:native_set_pte_at+0x1/0x10
[  547.075523] RSP: 0018:ffffc90002f0bb90 EFLAGS: 00010246
[  547.076703] RAX: 0000000000000000 RBX: ffff880200000000 RCX: 0000000000000000
[  547.078129] RDX: ffff880001000000 RSI: ffff880200000000 RDI: ffffffff820892e0
[  547.079549] RBP: ffffc90002f0bba8 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: ffffffff81ec7264
[  547.080969] R10: ffffc90002f0bb28 R11: ffff880322f518c0 R12: ffff880200200000
[  547.082389] R13: ffff88033ff00000 R14: ffff880200001000 R15: ffff880200000000
[  547.083816] FS:  00007fc08d585380(0000) GS:ffff880336040000(0000)
knlGS:0000000000000000
[  547.085777] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
[  547.087013] CR2: ffff880001000000 CR3: 000000019fe1f000 CR4: 00000000000406e0
[  547.091667] Call Trace:
[  547.092466]  ? pte_clear.constprop.18+0x26/0x2b
[  547.093563]  remove_pagetable+0x4af/0x783
[  547.094582]  arch_remove_memory+0xa2/0xc0
[  547.095598]  devm_memremap_pages_release+0xde/0x330
[  547.096726]  release_nodes+0x16d/0x2b0
[  547.097702]  devres_release_all+0x3c/0x50
[  547.098726]  device_release_driver_internal+0x16d/0x210
[  547.099900]  device_release_driver+0x12/0x20
[  547.100949]  unbind_store+0x10f/0x160
[

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web