Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mm/memory-failure: add panic_on_unrecoverable_memory_failure sysctl
From: Miaohe Lin
Date: Sun Apr 12 2026 - 23:42:46 EST
On 2026/4/10 22:17, Breno Leitao wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 07, 2026 at 10:57:36AM +0800, Miaohe Lin wrote:
>> On 2026/3/31 19:00, Breno Leitao wrote:
>>> + if (sysctl_panic_on_unrecoverable_mf && result == MF_IGNORED &&
>>> + (type == MF_MSG_KERNEL || type == MF_MSG_KERNEL_HIGH_ORDER ||
>>> + type == MF_MSG_UNKNOWN))
>>> + panic("Memory failure: %#lx: unrecoverable page", pfn);
>>
>> Will it be better to add a helper here?
>
> Yes, a helper would make things easier to read and digest. Thanks for
> the feedback. This is what I have in mind:
>
> commit 36d5b3cbbe6d6abfe3296b7b21135a5f01e743eb
> Author: Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon Mar 23 08:00:29 2026 -0700
>
> mm/memory-failure: add panic_on_unrecoverable_memory_failure sysctl
>
> Add a sysctl that allows the system to panic when an unrecoverable
> memory failure is detected. This covers kernel pages, high-order
> kernel pages, and unknown page types that cannot be recovered.
>
> Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/mm/memory-failure.c b/mm/memory-failure.c
> index 6ff80e01b91a4..a29b6688fe2d3 100644
> --- a/mm/memory-failure.c
> +++ b/mm/memory-failure.c
> @@ -74,6 +74,8 @@ static int sysctl_memory_failure_recovery __read_mostly = 1;
>
> static int sysctl_enable_soft_offline __read_mostly = 1;
>
> +static int sysctl_panic_on_unrecoverable_mf __read_mostly;
> +
> atomic_long_t num_poisoned_pages __read_mostly = ATOMIC_LONG_INIT(0);
>
> static bool hw_memory_failure __read_mostly = false;
> @@ -155,6 +157,15 @@ static const struct ctl_table memory_failure_table[] = {
> .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
> .extra1 = SYSCTL_ZERO,
> .extra2 = SYSCTL_ONE,
> + },
> + {
> + .procname = "panic_on_unrecoverable_memory_failure",
> + .data = &sysctl_panic_on_unrecoverable_mf,
> + .maxlen = sizeof(sysctl_panic_on_unrecoverable_mf),
> + .mode = 0644,
> + .proc_handler = proc_dointvec_minmax,
> + .extra1 = SYSCTL_ZERO,
> + .extra2 = SYSCTL_ONE,
> }
> };
>
> @@ -1281,6 +1292,16 @@ static void update_per_node_mf_stats(unsigned long pfn,
> ++mf_stats->total;
> }
>
> +static bool is_unrecoverable_memory_failure(enum mf_action_page_type type,
> + enum mf_result result)
Thanks for your update.
> +{
> + return sysctl_panic_on_unrecoverable_mf &&
> + result == MF_IGNORED &&
> + (type == MF_MSG_KERNEL ||
> + type == MF_MSG_KERNEL_HIGH_ORDER ||
> + type == MF_MSG_UNKNOWN);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * "Dirty/Clean" indication is not 100% accurate due to the possibility of
> * setting PG_dirty outside page lock. See also comment above set_page_dirty().
> @@ -1298,6 +1319,9 @@ static int action_result(unsigned long pfn, enum mf_action_page_type type,
> pr_err("%#lx: recovery action for %s: %s\n",
> pfn, action_page_types[type], action_name[result]);
>
> + if (is_unrecoverable_memory_failure(type, result))
Would it be better to name it as panic_on_unrecoverable_mf() or something like it?
This function determines whether panic on the specified memory error.
Thanks.
.