linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
To: Sumanth Korikkar <sumanthk@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
	Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mm: fix accounting of memmap pages for early sections
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2025 09:03:20 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250806090320.wdt4zsfiambtgkvy@master> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250804151328.2326642-1-sumanthk@linux.ibm.com>

On Mon, Aug 04, 2025 at 05:13:27PM +0200, Sumanth Korikkar wrote:
>memmap pages can be allocated either from the memblock (boot) allocator
>during early boot or from the buddy allocator.
>
>When these memmap pages are removed via arch_remove_memory(), the
>deallocation path depends on their source:
>
>* For pages from the buddy allocator, depopulate_section_memmap() is
>  called, which should decrement the count of nr_memmap_pages.
>
>* For pages from the boot allocator, free_map_bootmem() is called, which
>  should decrement the count of the nr_memmap_boot_pages.
>
>Ensure correct tracking of memmap pages for both early sections and non
>early sections by adjusting the accounting in section_deactivate().
>
>Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>Fixes: 15995a352474 ("mm: report per-page metadata information")
>Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>Signed-off-by: Sumanth Korikkar <sumanthk@linux.ibm.com>
>---
>v2: consider accounting for !CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP.
>
> mm/sparse.c | 9 ++++++---
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c
>index 3c012cf83cc2..b9cc9e548f80 100644
>--- a/mm/sparse.c
>+++ b/mm/sparse.c
>@@ -680,7 +680,6 @@ static void depopulate_section_memmap(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages,
> 	unsigned long start = (unsigned long) pfn_to_page(pfn);
> 	unsigned long end = start + nr_pages * sizeof(struct page);
> 
>-	memmap_pages_add(-1L * (DIV_ROUND_UP(end - start, PAGE_SIZE)));
> 	vmemmap_free(start, end, altmap);
> }
> static void free_map_bootmem(struct page *memmap)
>@@ -856,10 +855,14 @@ static void section_deactivate(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages,
> 	 * The memmap of early sections is always fully populated. See
> 	 * section_activate() and pfn_valid() .
> 	 */
>-	if (!section_is_early)
>+	if (!section_is_early) {
>+		memmap_pages_add(-1L * (DIV_ROUND_UP(nr_pages * sizeof(struct page), PAGE_SIZE)));
> 		depopulate_section_memmap(pfn, nr_pages, altmap);
>-	else if (memmap)
>+	} else if (memmap) {
>+		memmap_boot_pages_add(-1L * (DIV_ROUND_UP(nr_pages * sizeof(struct page),
>+				      PAGE_SIZE)));
> 		free_map_bootmem(memmap);
>+	}

The change here is reasonable. While maybe we still miss the counting at some
other points.

For example:

a. 

  sparse_init_nid()
    __populate_section_memmap()

If !CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, and sparse_buffer_alloc() return NULL, it
allocate extra memory from bootmem, which looks not counted.

b. 

  section_activate()
    populate_section_memmap()

If !CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP, it just call kvmalloc_node(), which looks not
counted.

Do I missed something?

> 
> 	if (empty)
> 		ms->section_mem_map = (unsigned long)NULL;
>-- 
>2.48.1
>

-- 
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me


  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-08-06  9:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-08-04 15:13 Sumanth Korikkar
2025-08-04 15:24 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-08-06  9:03 ` Wei Yang [this message]
2025-08-06 12:46   ` Sumanth Korikkar
2025-08-06 14:31     ` Wei Yang

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=20250806090320.wdt4zsfiambtgkvy@master \
    --to=richard.weiyang@gmail.com \
    --cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sumanthk@linux.ibm.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