From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>
Cc: Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Chen Pei <cp0613@linux.alibaba.com>,
George Guo <guodongtai@kylinos.cn>,
Kexin Liu <liukexin@kylinos.cn>,
Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] kho: fix bootmem sizing
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2026 20:36:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <auopkIsiqxzg4anJ@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2vxz5wydnbuj.fsf@kernel.org>
On Tue, Nov 03, 2026 at 05:01:08PM +0100, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> Hi Mike,
>
> On Tue, Nov 03 2026, Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) wrote:
>
> > Bootmem areas are sized from overlapping views of the memory reserved in
> > memblock:
> >
> > * the global area is sized from all reserved memory, including memory
> > allocated on specific nodes, so on NUMA systems everything allocated
> > on a node is accounted in both the global area and the area of that
> > node.
> > * per-node sizes are calculated after the lowmem and the global areas
> > are reserved. With CONFIG_NUMA=n all memblock regions belong to node 0,
> > so the lowmem and the global areas are accounted in the size of node 0
> > area and scaled once again.
> >
> > As a result, bootmem is about twice bigger than it should be on NUMA
> > systems and about four times bigger with CONFIG_NUMA=n. On small systems
> > reservation of the bootmem may fail and then KHO gets disabled.
> >
> > Make the areas cover separate parts of the reserved memory: the lowmem
> > area covers allocations below ARCH_LOW_ADDRESS_LIMIT, per-node areas
> > cover allocations above it on each node and the global area covers
> > allocations that are not bound to any node. Calculate all sizes before
> > reserving any of the areas.
> >
> > With CONFIG_NUMA=n the global area becomes empty and it is not reserved.
> >
> > Bootmem sizes in MiB in x86 QEMU VMs, before -> after:
> >
> > CONFIG_NUMA=y CONFIG_NUMA=n
> > 1G, 1 node 176 -> 92 320 -> 80
> > 4G, 1 node 508 -> 332 1264 -> 316
> > 16G, 2 nodes 1268 -> 704 2944 -> 736
> > 32G, 4 nodes 2296 -> 1224 5196 -> 1300
> > 64G, 4 nodes 4344 -> 2248 9664 -> 2420
> >
> > Fixes: 3dc92c311498 ("kexec: add Kexec HandOver (KHO) generation helpers")
> > Reported-by: Kexin Liu <liukexin@kylinos.cn>
> > Reported-by: George Guo <guodongtai@kylinos.cn>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260904025101.9959-1-dongtai.guo@linux.dev
> > Reported-by: Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com>
> > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260922131217.698809-1-sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <rppt@kernel.org>
>
> Thanks for the patch! My LLM caught an interesting problems that is
> worth considering.
>
> On arm64, ARCH_LOW_ADDRESS_LIMIT is arm64_dma_phys_limit - 1, and
> dma_limits_init() sets the default value to PHYS_MASK + 1, and it can
> also be memblock_end_of_dram() in some cases. So on arm64, it is
> possible for lowmem to span the entire RAM.
>
> Currently, that results in over-allocation of bootmem, and it ends up
> being 4x what it should be. While obviously problematic, it should still
> work. With this patch, all memory is in lowmem, and nothing ever goes to
> per-node bootmem (except for the node that hosts the lowmem area).
>
> All this is from reading the code, I haven't tried anything out yet.
>
> Not sure how to fix this though. Should we perhaps use
> min(ARCH_LOW_ADDRESS_LIMIT, U32_MAX) for the lowmem limit?
Argh :)
Maybe we reset lowmem to zero if memblock_end_of_DRAM() <
ARCH_LOW_ADDRESS_LIMIT?
> Also, a couple nitpicks below.
>
> > ---
> > kernel/liveupdate/kexec_handover.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> > 1 file changed, 44 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
> >
> > +
> > + lowmem = reserved_mem_size(ARCH_LOW_ADDRESS_LIMIT, NUMA_NO_NODE);
> > + global = reserved_mem_size(MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ANYWHERE, NUMA_NO_NODE);
> > + global -= lowmem;
>
> Nit: Please add a short comment above this to explain why you remove
> lowmem from global.
I prefer to extend the comment above the function to say that calculations
for global and node that includes lowmem remove that.
> --
> Regards,
> Pratyush Yadav
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-11-03 18:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-11-03 11:49 [PATCH 0/2] " Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
2026-11-03 11:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] kho: skip zero-sized lowmem and global bootmem areas Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
2026-11-03 14:14 ` Pratyush Yadav
2026-11-03 18:32 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-11-03 19:48 ` Pasha Tatashin
2026-11-03 11:49 ` [PATCH 2/2] kho: fix bootmem sizing Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
2026-11-03 16:01 ` Pratyush Yadav
2026-11-03 18:36 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=auopkIsiqxzg4anJ@kernel.org \
--to=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cp0613@linux.alibaba.com \
--cc=graf@amazon.com \
--cc=guodongtai@kylinos.cn \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=liukexin@kylinos.cn \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=pratyush@kernel.org \
--cc=sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®