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 2DB4CC282DE for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:23:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 25165280004; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 12:23:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 2000F280002; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 12:23:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 0C8AD280004; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 12:23:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2A50280002 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 12:23:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin30.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F7E814025E for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:23:24 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 83217047928.30.33CB611 Received: from mail-qk1-f171.google.com (mail-qk1-f171.google.com [209.85.222.171]) by imf04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA70640019 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:23:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf04.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gourry.net header.s=google header.b=d62IHkXM; spf=pass (imf04.hostedemail.com: domain of gourry@gourry.net designates 209.85.222.171 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gourry@gourry.net; dmarc=none ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1741883002; 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=KrRFUJhkeyaL1R2Vv0+vn3p6ZJnpUo2ZC2Z7tEGAZfw=; b=SSkzWoG5q9SNZTBLHfIFSZqy4tGGK9age0nBVmoYDWM/gSY28MewNIT7YuXRZ5Cp6CGiEH PxZVWLfy1bTW+Pt/LaY5CLXZZEncW7begRIrhmAE2JcBuUuvBLotx1B5lDSOM05zqO/oyP +DlAS0CYG4aOkzqan8P0Rb7xSdatH+Q= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf04.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=gourry.net header.s=google header.b=d62IHkXM; spf=pass (imf04.hostedemail.com: domain of gourry@gourry.net designates 209.85.222.171 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=gourry@gourry.net; dmarc=none ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1741883002; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=20BqK3zJYDsESp4NBckAqcS982hGtN51xCb0/CLCl8pHjGxg5YexKdzp94B7en+sA8E7oR fobUyfThM4Dagg/E1+tltLJMNzdXoAaPxUuWN4JWpik8yb3LhwXgydN+c4vrOj8Jd0h91g KcPmJPAIpXTdNl8gn4fQSWU+DBTXwkg= Received: by mail-qk1-f171.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7c54f67db99so211434685a.1 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 09:23:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gourry.net; s=google; t=1741883002; x=1742487802; darn=kvack.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=KrRFUJhkeyaL1R2Vv0+vn3p6ZJnpUo2ZC2Z7tEGAZfw=; b=d62IHkXMziYL4JCXCen8EEx47oQBWkFVzKG64lRDC3SI9IBARayUzMpWHqTXPg3Qw0 kyDE4DON9gx6syrkI/1H6ZjUsdyuvE7RGcMQ3xQ3lLYinG42pjG6A6pmidRD1u+ttz7H /nOvzaf1OPVfGrHoNXWT0EF1ZqtUmuyvx1QoMNkSHmw4aBkJ9FEx8xFhc1NvukBjh9Sr 2ERNiIbhxeckIA2cugxKbXJ1W/eV2Wij42+w1qEMcWSW8IHQJGIajGqalWi1j25WMpj7 LkVZap+nfOC41KrwuTXlgUm6WR9JikvYnVixFTPRUFZ7KeIxJOVtukJJeiDZp+cPgFeu 7dwA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1741883002; x=1742487802; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=KrRFUJhkeyaL1R2Vv0+vn3p6ZJnpUo2ZC2Z7tEGAZfw=; b=sg9426Zn6k1LeuGNGbjU7w9pnLt9cpDQPmi9jpnQDa/cAd9ZC770SfkZ4/uoafovi4 ucIdulcM624NWAXgujCwmVvPUU44oNJQ3e5cGC2twZdIimvJg1XNrCa2IECkXbZ18HhX 2xUwNcGfHdx5YQEJcols/VmOYFE5ThE5cE88ibEPqPaTaZaZU5OaBQ1T42ngwlnW7dEH yGtolbDBS4El0pnQ+7tipg1s7So3YJ+hDjlQCl6mBUoNktR9K/UQ7iZOtHJaWQfBdUpP 2Z2j9iTdke+ZnOADPvFX1Fg/dJNXwvp8ZnjnMPuUGT8TJ3FRybuzzOOQDG8YI/OFiCy7 GO8w== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXAy7A3KqJTCWI/h265hzeNDgZ/CH3f1TKr47Af+R6Lr7mPVyJj2u6Wg5ei6CKcZYJdoz83I3TZSg==@kvack.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwNtyuOcqPasGTDxflEKwmzqa5BEe5v9T58n1xDwhUvW8gIjZJg 9HmAY7VbMrhD+rSj/ODI/cgwLiaPRfp6HiRsj+dK3jl7c7kKYtCWjUK4isgYhjE= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuV1pP8MiwiQxsnV2NyUbAeOU0CkHXMqXzBbD0TuFVJk21xdeDCNRsoL5iy8Xf tmu7ejebRTUigOJSTos6h+ftKJVMCzYshOPUFShQi0W4n679xACjG/P3DDoJl3Z2EWWm26EVHmc Oim9zqmIVxB2j0ROblL3GmbQ4uNzg8fOg8FvbPg40k2pksOyDvnYyIlMnhMRhIgrIJO0uORPVrV 6NUq1+8HWRquCIZ/ISBIm13Kh7WHuHTVU1oPRv4EUExHLlZOHGlPBw7ICsxEr18c44HaYnP8Sya cN1CkDF3B9svTnOBVxkIsQFrLDEYl1hqbhXj4cyZPWOkXD5/WTbcqeXJRvs1/b5fEyp9mCUph2r rl1c0X7XkkZmX0BJa7KleTb9wXw4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFmSrDkHOW9CD4C+SfuWoYsDhx22Nfs217sGKgO8g7l8OBfmKzMb0gcROREHfpiz274St3PtA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:8323:b0:7c5:3da4:5bcb with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7c57376cde3mr447561585a.10.1741883001932; Thu, 13 Mar 2025 09:23:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gourry-fedora-PF4VCD3F (pool-173-79-56-208.washdc.fios.verizon.net. [173.79.56.208]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id af79cd13be357-7c573da455dsm114957785a.115.2025.03.13.09.23.21 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 13 Mar 2025 09:23:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 12:23:19 -0400 From: Gregory Price To: Rakie Kim Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org, joshua.hahnjy@gmail.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, ying.huang@linux.alibaba.com, kernel_team@skhynix.com, honggyu.kim@sk.com, yunjeong.mun@sk.com, david@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] mm/mempolicy: Support memory hotplug in weighted interleave Message-ID: References: <20250313063351.692-1-rakie.kim@sk.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250313063351.692-1-rakie.kim@sk.com> X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: BA70640019 X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Stat-Signature: 46oqs571byhot1cjmrwt3fn5rfkodi96 X-HE-Tag: 1741883002-962340 X-HE-Meta: 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 B6wy2tbu KH/MbVh02oHN+I8mrEcUD84p4BSKq65h3ckgFW+953MTarkaUDB+Qwo9sB5i5my5Yg39xgtTvgmO7DaEnSQdwxneE/mwjRZAt0CNGR1GMCUG2WiovL1jqAYUt3T82JzNZOL8BuFFAbRA1yfmKY4aMy0pkU+UB792K1A7Bw4XUXpfsdvPK4tSzD/zlPTLNNcJkxqiT2s4MQ4AS/1qcHmunAIZcWxYFSY5yi/6SO5U24rx9q+rzQZEd6yqjfosOYWgff5rtcgk4ckqm8077jaTDCuP2/63/Qpz7mPVOYyaKzRGXBMa6wxg1QWGK8oG3nbIm/o/09Kzgmr4Zv+s5zj4mnh96R6dYibAJMEyujeTgBh/+pq6hJ7t0ZZSzg8z46Cr/L39bZsox6sYpAmlrqTWmYU0+kA== 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: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Thu, Mar 13, 2025 at 03:33:37PM +0900, Rakie Kim wrote: > > I'm fairly certain this logic is wrong. If I add two memory blocks and > > then remove one, would this logic not remove the sysfs entries despite > > there being a block remaining? > > Regarding the assumption about node configuration: > Are you assuming that a node has two memory blocks and that > MEM_OFFLINE is triggered when one of them is offlined? If so, then > you are correct that this logic would need modification. > > I performed a simple test by offlining a single memory block: > # echo 0 > /sys/devices/system/node/node2/memory100/online > > In this case, MEM_OFFLINE was not triggered. However, I need to > conduct further analysis to confirm this behavior under different > conditions. I will review this in more detail and share my > findings, including the test methodology and results. > +David - might have a quick answer to this. I would have expected a single memory block going offline to cause a notification. I think the logic we care about is here: static void node_states_check_changes_online(unsigned long nr_pages, struct zone *zone, struct memory_notify *arg) { int nid = zone_to_nid(zone); arg->status_change_nid = NUMA_NO_NODE; arg->status_change_nid_normal = NUMA_NO_NODE; if (!node_state(nid, N_MEMORY)) arg->status_change_nid = nid; if (zone_idx(zone) <= ZONE_NORMAL && !node_state(nid, N_NORMAL_MEMORY)) arg->status_change_nid_normal = nid; } static void node_states_set_node(int node, struct memory_notify *arg) { if (arg->status_change_nid_normal >= 0) node_set_state(node, N_NORMAL_MEMORY); if (arg->status_change_nid >= 0) node_set_state(node, N_MEMORY); } int online_pages(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages, struct zone *zone, struct memory_group *group) { ... node_states_check_changes_online(nr_pages, zone, &arg); ... node_states_set_node(nid, &arg); ... memory_notify(MEM_ONLINE, &arg); } In the callback i think you want to check whether N_MEMORY is set + case MEM_OFFLINE: ++ if (node is !N_MEMORY) ++ sysfs_wi_node_release(node_attrs[nid], wi_kobj); + break; + } Similar with online (don't want to double-add). also from what I can tell, N_MEMORY implies N_ONLINE because N_ONLINE occurs when memory blocks are added (regardless of state). ~Gregory