Re: [PATCH v9 3/8] mm,memory_hotplug: Factor out adjusting present pages into adjust_present_page_count()

From: David Hildenbrand
Date: Wed Apr 21 2021 - 04:06:43 EST


On 21.04.21 10:00, Oscar Salvador wrote:
On Tue, Apr 20, 2021 at 11:45:55AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
On Fri 16-04-21 13:24:06, Oscar Salvador wrote:
From: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>

Let's have a single place (inspired by adjust_managed_page_count()) where
we adjust present pages.
In contrast to adjust_managed_page_count(), only memory onlining/offlining
is allowed to modify the number of present pages.

Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@xxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@xxxxxxx>

Not sure self review counts ;)

Uhm, the original author is David, I just added my signed-off-by as a deliverer.
I thought that in that case was ok to stick my Reviewed-by.
Or maybe my signed-off-by carries that implicitly.

Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx>

Btw. I strongly suspect the resize lock is quite pointless here.
Something for a follow up patch.

What makes you think that?
I have been thinking about this, let us ignore this patch for a moment.

If I poked the code correctly, node_size_lock is taken in:

remove_pfn_range_from_zone()
move_pfn_range_to_zone()

both of them handling {zone,node}->spanned_pages

Then we take it in {offline,online}_pages() for {zone,node}->present_pages.

The other places where we take it are __init functions, so not of interest.

Given that {offline,online}_pages() is serialized by the memory_hotplug lock,
I would say that {node,zone}->{spanned,present}_pages is, at any time, stable?
So, no need for the lock even without considering this patch?

Now, getting back to this patch.
adjust_present_page_count() will be called from memory_block_online(), which
is not holding the memory_hotplug lock yet.
But, we only fiddle with present pages out of {online,offline}_pages() if
we have vmemmap pages, and since that operates on the same memory block,
its lock should serialize that.

I think I went down a rabbit hole, I am slightly confused now.

We always hold the device hotplug lock when onlining/offlining memory.

I agree that the lock might be unnecessary (had the same thoughts a while ago), we can look into that in the future.

--
Thanks,

David / dhildenb