Re: [PATCH 5/5] mm, memory_hotplug: be more verbose for memory offline failures

[osalvador]

On Fri, 2018-11-16 at 12:22 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 16-11-18 11:47:01, osalvador wrote:
> > On Fri, 2018-11-16 at 09:30 +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> > > From: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>
> > > diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > index a919ba5cb3c8..ec2c7916dc2d 100644
> > > --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> > > @@ -7845,6 +7845,7 @@ bool has_unmovable_pages(struct zone *zone,
> > > struct page *page, int count,
> > >  	return false;
> > >  unmovable:
> > >  	WARN_ON_ONCE(zone_idx(zone) == ZONE_MOVABLE);
> > > +	dump_page(pfn_to_page(pfn+iter), "unmovable page");
> > 
> > Would not be enough to just do:
> > 
> > dump_page(page, "unmovable page".
> > 
> > Unless I am missing something, page should already have the
> > right pfn?
> 
> What if pfn_valid_within fails? You could have a pointer to the
> previous
> page.

Sorry, I missed that, you are right.

> > 
> > <---
> > unsigned long check = pfn + iter;
> > page = pfn_to_page(check);
> > --->
> > 
> > The rest looks good to me
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@xxxxxxx>
> 
> Thanks!
>