From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <owner-linux-mm@kvack.org>
Received: from mail-ed1-f71.google.com (mail-ed1-f71.google.com [209.85.208.71])
	by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B5856B6DD5
	for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Tue,  4 Dec 2018 03:53:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: by mail-ed1-f71.google.com with SMTP id c53so8023620edc.9
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 00:53:05 -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 u1-v6sor4178765eju.33.2018.12.04.00.53.03
        for <linux-mm@kvack.org>
        (Google Transport Security);
        Tue, 04 Dec 2018 00:53:04 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1543892757-4323-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com>
 <20181204065453.4rsyhtsk2aej4vim@master> <CAFgQCTvQBC11=4eGQ6T9vyB+KOznFCr4hjdg1wwD8GotSRWpDg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20181204083428.emgcaomg6vulknaq@master>
In-Reply-To: <20181204083428.emgcaomg6vulknaq@master>
From: Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 16:52:52 +0800
Message-ID: <CAFgQCTtY28w=9LLgOMT5J-SfKqz-Cirv-bNvXQvjazn_Ev4F4g@mail.gmail.com>
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: <linux-mm.kvack.org>
To: richard.weiyang@gmail.com
Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>

On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 4:34 PM Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 03:20:13PM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> >On Tue, Dec 4, 2018 at 2:54 PM Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 11:05:57AM +0800, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> >> >During my test on some AMD machine, with kexec -l nr_cpus=x option, the
> >> >kernel failed to bootup, because some node's data struct can not be allocated,
> >> >e.g, on x86, initialized by init_cpu_to_node()->init_memory_less_node(). But
> >> >device->numa_node info is used as preferred_nid param for
> >>
> >> could we fix the preferred_nid before passed to
> >> __alloc_pages_nodemask()?
> >>
> >Yes, we can doit too, but what is the gain?
>
> node_zonelist() is used some places. If we are sure where the problem
> is, it is not necessary to spread to other places.
>
> >
> >> BTW, I don't catch the function call flow to this point. Would you mind
> >> giving me some hint?
> >>
> >You can track the code along slab_alloc() ->...->__alloc_pages_nodemask()
>
> slab_alloc() pass NUMA_NO_NODE down, so I am lost in where the
> preferred_nid is assigned.
>
You can follow:
[    5.773618]  new_slab+0xa9/0x570
[    5.773618]  ___slab_alloc+0x375/0x540
[    5.773618]  ? pinctrl_bind_pins+0x2b/0x2a0
where static struct page *new_slab(struct kmem_cache *s, gfp_t flags, int node)

Thanks,
Pingfan