From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 194A5C4332F for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 20:53:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 6D32E6B0071; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 16:53:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 682F88E0001; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 16:53:06 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 572576B0074; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 16:53:06 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0013.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.13]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 489596B0071 for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 16:53:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin20.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay06.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10CCAAB03A for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 20:53:06 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 80096959572.20.8C790BD Received: from mail-pj1-f43.google.com (mail-pj1-f43.google.com [209.85.216.43]) by imf05.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 981C4100002 for ; Fri, 4 Nov 2022 20:53:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pj1-f43.google.com with SMTP id o7so5550002pjj.1 for ; Fri, 04 Nov 2022 13:53:05 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=dT53fcIb/e9PoLshhWJTyrDPvuuSKTjXYFWON0fSCp4=; b=VGk2BfsPPxk6pOhXuOvOy+3gNLTyiNSav+p0N+RgNaTszdYExYk9Rv81HJKjt9lTGt YWjnTO5m3SK7tYhPS1kw9vsq8kqn49g7ounMn5TU5ljHoGFGK71tb6O5Lgvc23NbEzXb LVQ0CwAT9/JVHZfu7S/KiKE0qyzRrMHECoNfhMgNO9xk9qC8OHgQ/NxxHx3cRQn2y12G aPoi5Bz8Qfavdyh3kQgISoo0T5XEDK8LVEJU43xe8vRzNDOpLmVpeWrg9HkbYlhXicgO TGJr1E8w2YwfhQUZrPDR9NOCGcJhc/W0TQ8oaPUo8jYAhG8ftmOVtY3owApLCDi3LwkO dmZw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=dT53fcIb/e9PoLshhWJTyrDPvuuSKTjXYFWON0fSCp4=; b=0i2N9i1Qa1+nXzbrdraMXE1Ke4JawGKsfPefHaIm3/y1eGwClIHFCAkHzkmCtjZgAj E2OS+yIA/2pP3Y0YaME0taWE6aYG3NnITG1L/ctMlOdQa9rC/7cATw4SEIyQ4vBPA1LV ZUXgPBUndfWW3YLKKhVYfa6rQEK52zmMA0oBtbAT2IrE5RbH0oqi9GzYNY0aukeu10r6 X8hAfbcAFJfsARFTnEPMDv84mxfWjrNlKxOttOrMLGlzH/D+G8AXZx4uptZGrl1/+ESU bkw+9abpEJurOUMMMLxdZ9EF+tzx3t1v4lS+NlCowe9kQYCd/DuE02xgvlCHiZp2okvf 8rZA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1E1ChREGjBa8ndKBHKC+ITRZl54TD81wvkDrA+iZT9NREUMeNr 0BpDsyeiLpZpxv8Bvh5ZPb16TDmX2kJItKyucHc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM7+zkbn82MBrNvYdD3ZdPXuPww5rOwg74bhtmffE7T48sLmiBgbQZ7zXDJ09ArWrdhHnlXkDn4C7LE0UGAWWks= X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:3291:b0:179:c436:4528 with SMTP id jh17-20020a170903329100b00179c4364528mr387000plb.102.1667595184532; Fri, 04 Nov 2022 13:53:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20221103213641.7296-1-shy828301@gmail.com> <20221103213641.7296-2-shy828301@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Yang Shi Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2022 13:52:52 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH 2/2] mm: don't warn if the node is offlined To: Michal Hocko Cc: zokeefe@google.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1667595185; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=dT53fcIb/e9PoLshhWJTyrDPvuuSKTjXYFWON0fSCp4=; b=O7cJKXnE5uPBzo+90bOhokdAr3biT60uuLWV1Fno9lIhnSM7yoKBee+I1W6yvBFTWew4eU 9N3sJdIjIZckMKSIRoqOGeON8ZVEw5USTQswzggdNJ0wLCrJFnJnVJEy61JY+ejEUt1JBr t0OBJBvYsDlFGs9AWSSaPfclB7WxxyI= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf05.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=VGk2BfsP; spf=pass (imf05.hostedemail.com: domain of shy828301@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.43 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shy828301@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1667595185; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=mX01B2xwTgo4oweszlvP5tpAjsJGmtDUtCiGR3SEnR3mPcV9ctgvjfj9NP1eXvdVMGQRAE UkX5d7ZIowljnpS7KikJyd/5n+uE3LCM+GUR/KV3hDKKa1RJVVBokpIRBAezMwLcFVUZjY 5PgFRYAEoprrQf+unFVWoN4nC5MvybY= X-Stat-Signature: zxyxhqhawxnzxrc54z43tojwb51zcsfj X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 981C4100002 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspam-User: Authentication-Results: imf05.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20210112 header.b=VGk2BfsP; spf=pass (imf05.hostedemail.com: domain of shy828301@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.43 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=shy828301@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com X-HE-Tag: 1667595185-584200 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 12:51 PM Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Fri 04-11-22 10:42:45, Yang Shi wrote: > > On Fri, Nov 4, 2022 at 2:56 AM Michal Hocko wrote: > > > > > > On Fri 04-11-22 10:35:21, Michal Hocko wrote: > > > [...] > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/gfp.h b/include/linux/gfp.h > > > > index ef4aea3b356e..308daafc4871 100644 > > > > --- a/include/linux/gfp.h > > > > +++ b/include/linux/gfp.h > > > > @@ -227,7 +227,10 @@ static inline > > > > struct folio *__folio_alloc_node(gfp_t gfp, unsigned int order, int nid) > > > > { > > > > VM_BUG_ON(nid < 0 || nid >= MAX_NUMNODES); > > > > - VM_WARN_ON((gfp & __GFP_THISNODE) && !node_online(nid)); > > > > + if((gfp & __GFP_THISNODE) && !node_online(nid)) { > > > > > > or maybe even better > > > if ((gfp & (__GFP_THISNODE|__GFP_NOWARN) == __GFP_THISNODE|__GFP_NOWARN) && !node_online(nid)) > > > > > > because it doesn't really make much sense to dump this information if > > > the allocation failure is going to provide sufficient (and even more > > > comprehensive) context for the failure. It looks more hairy but this can > > > be hidden in a nice little helper shared between the two callers. > > > > Thanks a lot for the suggestion, printing warning if the gfp flag > > allows sounds like a good idea to me. Will adopt it. But the check > > should look like: > > > > if ((gfp & __GFP_THISNODE) && !(gfp & __GFP_NOWARN) && !node_online(nid)) > > The idea was to warn if __GFP_NOWARN _was_ specified. Otherwise we will > get an allocation failure splat from the page allocator and there it > will be clear that the node doesn't have any memory associated. It is > exactly __GFP_NOWARN case that would be a silent failure and potentially > a buggy code (like this THP collapse path). See my point? Aha, yeah, see your point now. I didn't see the splat from the allocator from the bug report, then I realized it had not called into allocator yet before the warning was triggered. > -- > Michal Hocko > SUSE Labs