All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.1-rc5
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 20:41:44 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190418204144.16adf2a0@mschwideX1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=whajv8Fw2VcBqZUs0hfx1Dq4fYj3TEEx4yfR3E8+rLS1A@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 08:49:32 -0700
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 1:02 AM Martin Schwidefsky
> <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > The problematic lines in the generic gup code are these three:
> >
> > 1845:   pmdp = pmd_offset(&pud, addr);
> > 1888:   pudp = pud_offset(&p4d, addr);
> > 1916:   p4dp = p4d_offset(&pgd, addr);
> >
> > Passing the pointer of a *copy* of a page table entry to pxd_offset() does
> > not work with the page table folding on s390.  
> 
> Hmm. I wonder why. x86 too does the folding thing for the p4d and pud case.
> 
> The folding works with the local copy just the same way it works with
> the orignal value.

The difference is that with the static page table folding pgd_offset()
does the index calculation of the actual hardware top-level table. With
dynamic page table folding as s390 is doing it, if the task does not use
a 5-level page table pgd_offset() will see a pgd_index() of 0, the indexing
of the actual top-level table is done later with p4d_offset(), pud_offset()
or pmd_offset(). 

As an example, with a three level page table we have three indexes x/y/z.
The common code "thinks" 5 indexing steps, with static folding the index
sequence is x 0 0 y z. With dynamic folding the sequence is 0 0 x y z.
By moving the first indexing operation to pgd_offset the static sequence
does not add an index to a non-dereferenced pointer to a stack variable,
the dynamic sequence does.

> But I see that s390 does some other kind of folding and does that
> addition of the p*d_index() unconditionally.
> 
> I guess that does mean that s390 will just have to have its own walker.
> 
> For the issue of the page refcount overflow it really isn't a huge
> deal. Adding the refcount checking is simple (see the example patch I
> gave for powerpc - you'll just have a couple of extra cases since you
> do it all, rather than just the special hugetlb cases).
> 
> Obviously in general it would have been nicer to share as much code as
> possible, but let's not make things unnecessarily complex if s390 is
> just fundamentally different..

It would have been nice to use the generic code (less bugs) but not at
the price of over-complicating things. And that page table folding thing
always makes my head hurt.

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 5.1-rc5
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2019 20:41:44 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190418204144.16adf2a0@mschwideX1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=whajv8Fw2VcBqZUs0hfx1Dq4fYj3TEEx4yfR3E8+rLS1A@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 08:49:32 -0700
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 1:02 AM Martin Schwidefsky
> <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> >
> > The problematic lines in the generic gup code are these three:
> >
> > 1845:   pmdp = pmd_offset(&pud, addr);
> > 1888:   pudp = pud_offset(&p4d, addr);
> > 1916:   p4dp = p4d_offset(&pgd, addr);
> >
> > Passing the pointer of a *copy* of a page table entry to pxd_offset() does
> > not work with the page table folding on s390.  
> 
> Hmm. I wonder why. x86 too does the folding thing for the p4d and pud case.
> 
> The folding works with the local copy just the same way it works with
> the orignal value.

The difference is that with the static page table folding pgd_offset()
does the index calculation of the actual hardware top-level table. With
dynamic page table folding as s390 is doing it, if the task does not use
a 5-level page table pgd_offset() will see a pgd_index() of 0, the indexing
of the actual top-level table is done later with p4d_offset(), pud_offset()
or pmd_offset(). 

As an example, with a three level page table we have three indexes x/y/z.
The common code "thinks" 5 indexing steps, with static folding the index
sequence is x 0 0 y z. With dynamic folding the sequence is 0 0 x y z.
By moving the first indexing operation to pgd_offset the static sequence
does not add an index to a non-dereferenced pointer to a stack variable,
the dynamic sequence does.

> But I see that s390 does some other kind of folding and does that
> addition of the p*d_index() unconditionally.
> 
> I guess that does mean that s390 will just have to have its own walker.
> 
> For the issue of the page refcount overflow it really isn't a huge
> deal. Adding the refcount checking is simple (see the example patch I
> gave for powerpc - you'll just have a couple of extra cases since you
> do it all, rather than just the special hugetlb cases).
> 
> Obviously in general it would have been nicer to share as much code as
> possible, but let's not make things unnecessarily complex if s390 is
> just fundamentally different..

It would have been nice to use the generic code (less bugs) but not at
the price of over-complicating things. And that page table folding thing
always makes my head hurt.

-- 
blue skies,
   Martin.

"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.

  reply	other threads:[~2019-04-18 18:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-14 22:40 Linux 5.1-rc5 Linus Torvalds
2019-04-15  5:19 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-04-15 16:17   ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-15 16:17     ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-16  9:09     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-16  9:09       ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-16 12:06       ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-16 12:06         ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-16 16:16         ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-16 16:16           ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-16 16:49           ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-16 16:49             ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-17  7:46             ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-17  7:46               ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-17  8:02               ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-17  8:02                 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-17 16:57                 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-17 16:57                   ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-18  8:02                   ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-18  8:02                     ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-18 15:49                     ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-18 15:49                       ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-18 18:41                       ` Martin Schwidefsky [this message]
2019-04-18 18:41                         ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-19 13:33                         ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-19 13:33                           ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-19 17:27                           ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-19 17:27                             ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-23 15:38                             ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-23 15:38                               ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-04-23 16:06                               ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-23 16:06                                 ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-17  3:38     ` Michael Ellerman
2019-04-17  3:38       ` Michael Ellerman
2019-04-17  4:13       ` Linus Torvalds
2019-04-17  4:13         ` Linus Torvalds
2019-05-02 12:21     ` Greg KH
2019-05-02 12:21       ` Greg KH
2019-05-02 14:17       ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-05-02 14:17         ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-05-02 14:31         ` Greg KH
2019-05-02 14:31           ` Greg KH
2019-05-02 15:10           ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-05-02 15:10             ` Martin Schwidefsky
2019-05-20 11:09             ` Greg KH
2019-05-20 11:09               ` Greg KH
2019-05-03 13:31       ` Michael Ellerman
2019-05-03 13:31         ` Michael Ellerman
2019-05-02 23:15     ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-02 23:15       ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-05-02 23:15       ` Christoph Hellwig

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=20190418204144.16adf2a0@mschwideX1 \
    --to=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.