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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20FA5C4338F for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 03:09:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FA7060F11 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 03:08:59 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 9FA7060F11 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C9A2B6B0071; Tue, 10 Aug 2021 23:08:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C48AE6B0072; Tue, 10 Aug 2021 23:08:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id B37368D0001; Tue, 10 Aug 2021 23:08:58 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0178.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.178]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96E6E6B0071 for ; Tue, 10 Aug 2021 23:08:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin29.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D9931807EE90 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 03:08:58 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78461317956.29.B9E82C0 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf21.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FD49D00CE10 for ; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 03:08:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=ji70bBzWzyIsNlqNlXXzqEpkz30w2PSWcwSbBgj0JSc=; b=YiyeRQe1UYy2bOPJOEId3lcakg 5ipV5ZHAtgBoeVZP0G5lOcOIHtjcFveclB421+VGjvuAjJP+Ccfjdpa6cPU8Iyj06nxBorajI3PoU hjGp6s6ZNUO3JkXt6hKwVjL6w8xQ856+U7onoFhTQjis8NECtSPpQIudXhRqINQg0t4Jzkid2cLOC HLn5A419STBphrTGZ3pilr/TKjEb+co20dEKqvdGf4H8ahYm3Xify0F2+2mimGfPmwD2cD7KZ7qLu lx0Rv7i2IS2RalNyMzCtJ1ZOom+j5MAyuO/I1E1VKCzEn3hly4ZW3QAZORtLgDeGXDt5vTyjh+mwl sIJcWxvw==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mDeZO-00CtQg-An; Wed, 11 Aug 2021 03:06:34 +0000 Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 04:06:18 +0100 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Qian Cai Cc: Mike Rapoport , David Hildenbrand , Mike Kravetz , Linux Memory Management List , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Linux-next: crash in alloc_huge_page() Message-ID: References: <846c4502-3332-0d25-87f5-cb3b71afc38f@quicinc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <846c4502-3332-0d25-87f5-cb3b71afc38f@quicinc.com> Authentication-Results: imf21.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=YiyeRQe1; spf=none (imf21.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org; dmarc=none X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 5FD49D00CE10 X-Stat-Signature: ifck93xdbmzfyytnq9t8woirigff9zej X-HE-Tag: 1628651336-397242 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 Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 10:22:37PM -0400, Qian Cai wrote: > and the page->lru has an address fffffffffffffffc for some reasons. Does it sound like some error code > had not been handled properly and had been propagated here instead? I tried reverting a few recent > commits for mm/hugetlb.c and mm/memblock.c without luck so far. Yes, ff..fc is going to be at offset 8 from the actual address, so that's -12 and -12 is ... #define ENOMEM 12 /* Out of memory */ so something's returning ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM) instead of NULL. > [ 8107.262232][T62705] Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address fffffffffffffffc These logs would be a lot easier to read if you snipped the irrelevant timestamp and whatever this Txxxxx thing is.