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=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 B0377CA9EA1 for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:38:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E177222C3 for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:38:26 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 7E177222C3 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 133878E0014; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 04:38:26 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 0E3B78E0003; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 04:38:26 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id F3CEE8E0014; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 04:38:25 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0083.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.83]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D22EB8E0003 for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 04:38:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin16.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay03.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 6BE94802E01D for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:38:25 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76056253770.16.cap20_83a177ca12b0a X-HE-Tag: cap20_83a177ca12b0a X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 2625 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by imf08.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:38:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1C20306A21B; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:38:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.118.57] (unknown [10.36.118.57]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 526C15D713; Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:38:22 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: memory offline infinite loop after soft offline To: Michal Hocko Cc: Naoya Horiguchi , Qian Cai , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Mike Kravetz References: <1570829564.5937.36.camel@lca.pw> <20191014083914.GA317@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191017093410.GA19973@hori.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp> <20191017100106.GF24485@dhcp22.suse.cz> <1571335633.5937.69.camel@lca.pw> <20191017182759.GN24485@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20191018021906.GA24978@hori.linux.bs1.fc.nec.co.jp> <33946728-bdeb-494a-5db8-e279acebca47@redhat.com> <20191018082459.GE5017@dhcp22.suse.cz> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 10:38:21 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20191018082459.GE5017@dhcp22.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.43]); Fri, 18 Oct 2019 08:38:23 +0000 (UTC) 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 18.10.19 10:24, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 18-10-19 10:13:36, David Hildenbrand wrote: > [...] >> However, if the compound page spans multiple pageblocks > > Although hugetlb pages spanning pageblocks are possible this shouldn't > matter in__test_page_isolated_in_pageblock because this function doesn't > really operate on pageblocks as the name suggests. It is simply > traversing all valid RAM ranges (see walk_system_ram_range). As long as the hugepages don't span memory blocks/sections, you are right. I have no experience with gigantic pages in this regard. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb