tree 36cda7a7735a38e92a6dc2ed58395cd3f337494d
parent 1abaf3326bf2a2fabd6a0b6258e9cb33d734050a
author Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com> 1236714945 -0700
committer Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> 1236725710 -0700

mm: get_nid_for_pfn() returns int

get_nid_for_pfn() returns int

Presumably the (nid < 0) case has never happened.

We do know that it is happening on one system while creating a symlink for
a memory section so it should also happen on the same system if
unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes() were called to remove the same symlink.

The test was actually added in response to a problem with an earlier
version reported by Yasunori Goto where one or more of the leading pages
of a memory section on the 2nd node of one of his systems was
uninitialized because I believe they coincided with a memory hole.

That earlier version did not ignore uninitialized pages and determined
the nid by considering only the 1st page of each memory section.  This
caused the symlink to the 1st memory section on the 2nd node to be
incorrectly created in /sys/devices/system/node/node0 instead of
/sys/devices/system/node/node1.  The problem was fixed by adding the
test to skip over uninitialized pages.

I suspect we have not seen any reports of the non-removal
of a symlink due to the incorrect declaration of the nid
variable in unregister_mem_sect_under_nodes() because
  - systems where a memory section could have an uninitialized
    range of leading pages are probably rare.
  - memory remove is probably not done very frequently on the
    systems that are capable of demonstrating the problem.
  - lingering symlink(s) that should have been removed may
    have simply gone unnoticed.

[garyhade@us.ibm.com: wrote changelog]
Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>
Cc: Gary Hade <garyhade@us.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>