On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 03:49:47PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 22:36:18 +0000 HORIGUCHI NAOYA(堀口 直也) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 12:17:42PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > On Wed, 24 Jun 2020 15:01:22 +0000 [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > I rebased soft-offline rework patchset [1][2] onto the latest mmotm. > > > > The > > > > rebasing required some non-trivial changes to adjust, but mainly that > > > > was > > > > straightforward. I confirmed that the reported problem doesn't > > > > reproduce on > > > > compaction after soft offline. For more precise description of the > > > > problem > > > > and the motivation of this patchset, please see [2]. > > > > > > > > I think that the following two patches in v2 are better to be done with > > > > separate work of hard-offline rework, so it's not included in this > > > > series. > > > > > > > > - mm,hwpoison: Take pages off the buddy when hard-offlining > > > > - mm/hwpoison-inject: Rip off duplicated checks > > > > > > > > These two are not directly related to the reported problem, so they > > > > seems > > > > not urgent. And the first one breaks num_poisoned_pages counting in > > > > some > > > > testcases, and The second patch needs more consideration about > > > > commented point. > > > > > > > > > > It would be nice to have some sort of overview of the patch series in > > > this [0/n] email. > > > > > > > [1] v1: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/[email protected]/ > > > > [2] v2: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/[email protected]/ > > > > > > The above have such, but are they up to date? > > > > The description of the problem doesn't change, but there're some new patches > > and some patches are postponed, so I should've added an overview of this > > series: > > > > - patch 1, 2 are cleanups. > > - patch 3, 4, 5 change the precondition when calling memory_failure(). > > Previously > > we sometimes call it with holding refcount of the target page and > > somtimes call > > without holding it, and we passed a flag of whether refcount was taken > > out of > > memory_failure(). It was confusing and caused code more complex than > > needed. > > - patch 6-10 are cleanups. > > - patch 11 introduces new logic to remove the error page from buddy > > allocator, > > which is also applied to the path of soft-offling in-use pages in patch > > 12. > > - patch 13 is basically a refactoring but I added some adjustment to make > > sure > > that the freed page is surely sent back to buddy instead of being kept in > > pcplist, > > which is based on discussion in v2. > > - patch 14 fixes the inconsistency of return values between injection > > interfaces. > > - patch 15 is a new patch to complement missing code found in code review > > for > > previous version. > > > > Core change is in patch 11 and 12, and the others are kind of > > cleanup/refactoring. > > And all the other words in > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/[email protected]/ > are still accurate and complete?
Yes, they are. - Naoya
