From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ed1-f70.google.com (mail-ed1-f70.google.com [209.85.208.70]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54E8E6B6D76 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 02:16:52 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ed1-f70.google.com with SMTP id e12so7781298edd.16 for ; Mon, 03 Dec 2018 23:16:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-sor-f65.google.com (mail-sor-f65.google.com. [209.85.220.65]) by mx.google.com with SMTPS id cw22-v6sor4418479ejb.29.2018.12.03.23.16.50 for (Google Transport Security); Mon, 03 Dec 2018 23:16:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1543892757-4323-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Pingfan Liu Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 15:16:39 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/alloc: fallback to first node if the wanted node offline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: David Rientjes Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Bjorn Helgaas , Jonathan Cameron On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 11:53 AM David Rientjes wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Dec 2018, Pingfan Liu wrote: > > > diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h > > index 76f8db0..8324953 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/gfp.h > > +++ b/include/linux/gfp.h > > @@ -453,6 +453,8 @@ static inline int gfp_zonelist(gfp_t flags) > > */ > > static inline struct zonelist *node_zonelist(int nid, gfp_t flags) > > { > > + if (unlikely(!node_online(nid))) > > + nid = first_online_node; > > return NODE_DATA(nid)->node_zonelists + gfp_zonelist(flags); > > } > > > > So we're passing the node id from dev_to_node() to kmalloc which > interprets that as the preferred node and then does node_zonelist() to > find the zonelist at allocation time. > > What happens if we fix this in alloc_dr()? Does anything else cause > problems? > I think it is better to fix it mm, since it can protect any new similar bug in future. While fixing in alloc_dr() just work at present > And rather than using first_online_node, would next_online_node() work? > What is the gain? Is it for memory pressure on node0? Thanks, Pingfan > I'm thinking about this: > > diff --git a/drivers/base/devres.c b/drivers/base/devres.c > --- a/drivers/base/devres.c > +++ b/drivers/base/devres.c > @@ -100,6 +100,8 @@ static __always_inline struct devres * alloc_dr(dr_release_t release, > &tot_size))) > return NULL; > > + if (unlikely(!node_online(nid))) > + nid = next_online_node(nid); > dr = kmalloc_node_track_caller(tot_size, gfp, nid); > if (unlikely(!dr)) > return NULL;