linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>
To: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>, Yuan Liu <yuan1.liu@intel.com>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
	Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
	linux-mm@kvack.org, Yong Hu <yong.hu@intel.com>,
	Nanhai Zou <nanhai.zou@intel.com>,
	Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
	Qiuxu Zhuo <qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com>,
	Yu C Chen <yu.c.chen@intel.com>, Pan Deng <pan.deng@intel.com>,
	Tianyou Li <tianyou.li@intel.com>,
	Chen Zhang <zhangchen.kidd@jd.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] mm/memory hotplug/unplug: Optimize zone contiguous check when changing pfn range
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 2026 20:24:05 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1928b6b0-2ec3-43ca-a41b-e880d974af04@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260413130633.knzkliyqvjhuz2kd@master>

>   With the last memblock region fits in Node 1 Zone Normal. 
> 
>   Then I punch a hole in this region with 2M(subsection) size with following
>   change, to mimic there is a hole in memory range:
> 
>     @@ -1372,5 +1372,8 @@ __init void e820__memblock_setup(void)
>             /* Throw away partial pages: */
>             memblock_trim_memory(PAGE_SIZE);
>      
>     +       memblock_remove(0x140000000, 0x200000);
>     +
>             memblock_dump_all();
>      }
>     
>   Then the memblock dump shows:
> 
>      MEMBLOCK configuration:
>       memory size = 0x000000017fd7dc00 reserved size = 0x0000000005a97 9c2
>       memory.cnt  = 0x4
>       memory[0x0]     [0x0000000000001000-0x000000000009efff], 0x000000000009e000 bytes on node 0 flags: 0x0
>       memory[0x1]     [0x0000000000100000-0x00000000bffdefff], 0x00000000bfedf000 bytes on node 0 flags: 0x0
>   +-  memory[0x2]     [0x0000000100000000-0x000000013fffffff], 0x0000000040000000 bytes on node 1 flags: 0x0
>   +-  memory[0x3]     [0x0000000140200000-0x00000001bfffffff], 0x000000007fe00000 bytes on node 1 flags: 0x0
> 
>   We can see the original one memblock region is divided into two, with a hole
>   of 2M in the middle.

Yes, that makes sense.

> 
>   Not sure this is a reasonable mimic of memory hole. Also I tried to
>   punch a larger hole, e.g. 10M, still see the behavioral change.
> 
> The /proc/zoneinfo result:
> 
>     w/o patch
> 
>     Node 1, zone   Normal
>       pages free     469271
>             boost    0
>             min      8567
>             low      10708
>             high     12849
>             promo    14990
>             spanned  786432
>             present  785920
>             contigu  0           <--- zone is non-contiguous
>             managed  766024
>             cma      0
>     
>     with patch
> 
>     Node 1, zone   Normal
>       pages free     121098
>             boost    0
>             min      8665
>             low      10831
>             high     12997
>             promo    15163
>             spanned  786432
>             present  785920
>             contigu  1           <--- zone is contiguous
>             managed  773041
>             cma      0
> 
>   This shows we treat Node 1 Zone Normal as non-contiguous before, but treat
>   it a contiguous zone after this patch.
> 
> Reason:
> 
>   set_zone_contiguous()
>       __pageblock_pfn_to_page()
>           pfn_to_online_page()
> 	      pfn_section_valid() <--- check subsection
> 
>   When SPARSEMEM_VMEMMEP is set, pfn_section_valid() checks subsection bit to
>   decide if it is valid. For a hole, the corresponding bit is not set. So it
>   is non-contiguous before the patch.
> 
>   After this patch, the memory map in this hole also contributes to
>   pages_with_online_memmap, so it is treated as contiguous.

That means that mm init code actually initialized a memmap, so there is
a memmap there that is properly initialized?

So init_unavailable_range()->for_each_valid_pfn() processed these
sub-section holes I guess.

subsection_map_init() takes care of initializing the subsections. That
happens before memmap_init() in free_area_init().

Is there a problem in for_each_valid_pfn()?


And I think there is in first_valid_pfn:

	if (valid_section(ms) &&
	    (early_section(ms) || pfn_section_first_valid(ms, &pfn))) {
		rcu_read_unlock_sched();
		return pfn;
	}

The PFN is valid, but we actually care about whether it will be online.
So likely, we should skip over sub-sections here also for early sections
(even though the memmap exist, nobody should be looking at it, just like
for an offline memory section).

> 
> Some question:
> 
>   I suspect with !SPARSEMEM_VMEMMEP, we always treat Zone Normal as
>   contiguous, because we don't set subsection. So it looks the behavior is
>   different from SPARSEMEM_VMEMMEP. But I didn't manage to build kernel with
>   !SPARSEMEM_VMEMMEP to verify.
> 
>   I see the discussion on defining zone->contiguous as safe to use
>   pfn_to_page() for the whole zone. For this purpose, current change looks
>   good to me. Since we do allocate and init memory map for holes.

Right.

> 
>   But pageblock_pfn_to_page() is used for compaction and other. A pfn with
>   memory map but no actual memory seems not guarantee to be a usable page. So
>   the correct usage of pageblock_pfn_to_page() is after
>   pageblock_pfn_to_page() return a page, we should validate each page in the
>   range before using? I am a little lost here.

These non-existent pages (holes) are no different than allocated
un-movable memory. So compaction code must deal with them. Just like
smaller memory holes that don't cover a full memory section.

-- 
Cheers,

David


      reply	other threads:[~2026-04-13 18:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-08  3:16 Yuan Liu
2026-04-08  7:36 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-08 12:29   ` Liu, Yuan1
2026-04-08 12:31     ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-08 12:37       ` Liu, Yuan1
2026-04-09 14:40   ` Mike Rapoport
2026-04-09 15:08     ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-04-13 13:06 ` Wei Yang
2026-04-13 18:24   ` David Hildenbrand (Arm) [this message]

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=1928b6b0-2ec3-43ca-a41b-e880d974af04@kernel.org \
    --to=david@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=nanhai.zou@intel.com \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=pan.deng@intel.com \
    --cc=qiuxu.zhuo@intel.com \
    --cc=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
    --cc=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=tianyou.li@intel.com \
    --cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=yong.hu@intel.com \
    --cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=yuan1.liu@intel.com \
    --cc=zhangchen.kidd@jd.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