Re: [PATCH v1 3/4] mm/memory_hotplug: Simplify online_pages_range()

[David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>]

On 14.08.19 16:19, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 09-08-19 14:57:00, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> move_pfn_range_to_zone() will set all pages to PG_reserved via
>> memmap_init_zone(). The only way a page could no longer be reserved
>> would be if a MEM_GOING_ONLINE notifier would clear PG_reserved - which
>> is not done (the online_page callback is used for that purpose by
>> e.g., Hyper-V instead). walk_system_ram_range() will never call
>> online_pages_range() with duplicate PFNs, so drop the PageReserved() check.
>>
>> Simplify the handling, as online_pages always corresponds to nr_pages.
>> There is no need for online_pages_blocks() anymore.
> 
> This would be easier to review if split up into two patches. One that
> only performs cleanup without any other changes and the PageReserved
> check. I like the check going away and we should get rid of the
> dependency on the Reserved bit completely.

Yes, makes sense.

> 
> Other than that I find the start_pfn and pfn being used both for
> iteration each a different way really confusing and I cannot convince
> myself it is even correct because I didn't bother to look deeper as
> I simply think that the order manipulation from the previous is just
> making things worse at this moment. If the problem is even real then it
> can be done on top instead with some real example of the memory layout
> that breaks.

Yes, I'll rework this. Only "pfn" should be used in the loop (it seems
to be correct but confusing I agree).

-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb