From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Chris von Recklinghausen <crecklin@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drivers/base/node.c: Simplify unregister_memory_block_under_nodes()
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2019 14:15:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191127141532.525708b65a96fd614595bae8@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b2e31976-b07d-11e6-f806-f13f4619be4d@redhat.com>
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 17:53:12 +0100 David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
> Just a note that this was actually also a bugfix as noted by Chris.
>
> If the memory we are removing was never onlined,
> get_nid_for_pfn()->pfn_to_nid() will return garbage. Removing will
> succeed but links will remain in place.
>
> Can be triggered by
>
> 1. hotplugging a DIMM to node 1
> 2. not onlining the memory blocks
> 3. unplugging it
> 4. re-plugging it to node 1
>
> We will trigger the BUG_ON(ret) in add_memory_resource(), because
> link_mem_sections() will return with -EEXIST.
Oh. In that case case we please redo the patch as a bugfix?
Appropriate title and changelog? And perhaps the bugfix can be split
from the cleanup, to make the former more backportable?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-27 22:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-19 13:52 David Hildenbrand
2019-11-27 16:53 ` David Hildenbrand
2019-11-27 22:15 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2019-11-27 22:55 ` 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=20191127141532.525708b65a96fd614595bae8@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=crecklin@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
/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