From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Peng Liu <liupeng256@huawei.com>,
mike.kravetz@oracle.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
yaozhenguo1@gmail.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] hugetlb: Fix hugepages_setup when deal with pernode
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2022 12:43:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0aefbc18-4232-0bae-b37a-d4c6995e3d00@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220401101232.2790280-2-liupeng256@huawei.com>
On 01.04.22 12:12, Peng Liu wrote:
> Hugepages can be specified to pernode since "hugetlbfs: extend
> the definition of hugepages parameter to support node allocation",
> but the following problem is observed.
>
> Confusing behavior is observed when both 1G and 2M hugepage is set
> after "numa=off".
> cmdline hugepage settings:
> hugepagesz=1G hugepages=0:3,1:3
> hugepagesz=2M hugepages=0:1024,1:1024
> results:
> HugeTLB registered 1.00 GiB page size, pre-allocated 0 pages
> HugeTLB registered 2.00 MiB page size, pre-allocated 1024 pages
>
> Furthermore, confusing behavior can be also observed when invalid
> node behind valid node.
>
> To fix this, hugetlb_hstate_alloc_pages should be called even when
> hugepages_setup going to invalid.
Shouldn't we bail out if someone requests node-specific allocations but
we are not running with NUMA?
What's the result after your change?
>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
I am not sure if this is really stable material.
> Fixes: b5389086ad7b ("hugetlbfs: extend the definition of hugepages parameter to support node allocation")
> Signed-off-by: Peng Liu <liupeng256@huawei.com>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-01 10:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-01 10:12 [PATCH v2 0/2] hugetlb: Fix confusing behavior Peng Liu
2022-04-01 10:12 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] hugetlb: Fix hugepages_setup when deal with pernode Peng Liu
2022-04-01 10:43 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2022-04-01 17:23 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-04-04 10:41 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-04-04 23:48 ` Mike Kravetz
2022-04-02 2:36 ` liupeng (DM)
2022-04-01 10:12 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] hugetlb: Fix return value of __setup handlers Peng Liu
2022-04-01 10:46 ` David Hildenbrand
2022-04-02 1:33 ` liupeng (DM)
2022-04-04 10:25 ` David Hildenbrand
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=0aefbc18-4232-0bae-b37a-d4c6995e3d00@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liupeng256@huawei.com \
--cc=mike.kravetz@oracle.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yaozhenguo1@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox