From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E2CD33CA for ; Tue, 3 May 2022 20:24:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1651609466; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=XuOARFW3gYZOmM4Y4nSXFBD8lHm6BchzW975izB6OwE=; b=Qg51rm1rXtnX1bLKv8Ve4w6xG4oUjOwJifG0I3HeVawg2X8xXjcJXWfmi74b2SP3uxFlBy g/7cpQZ3aVBIL5ik3+Cf8cFUbhTC8ktJkWBJE8kYh32gQCh1I+MrSr6SB8lt9W7zc9TTNa e897/ElNirWk+9/BFNtcNBmoPQ05Bww= Received: from mail-ot1-f72.google.com (mail-ot1-f72.google.com [209.85.210.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-100-HrT7gWrPMRmTbEuMZUxe8w-1; Tue, 03 May 2022 16:21:24 -0400 X-MC-Unique: HrT7gWrPMRmTbEuMZUxe8w-1 Received: by mail-ot1-f72.google.com with SMTP id s15-20020a0568301c6f00b00605d7b44d8eso7732043otg.9 for ; Tue, 03 May 2022 13:21:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:organization:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=XuOARFW3gYZOmM4Y4nSXFBD8lHm6BchzW975izB6OwE=; b=qo/FzfELbLalFiYrSnE9pYTrvLz8PRVD323J6qUDK/QjhOmeVmL9utCqeVJV8A+OqG 3SHa/5oNIhaZDjx9lLWKeqL2xyMSJ7bekGqs4ery5NsrZdVFjjMz26GiJJ1ZJbM2XoUU LcmyvazJPh4L7hNxL6kzPCdq+npHMXge8FulAM5u3fpnbo+icnc4op3zM1PXp9yfFi/Z vxKNB2x3ZeVSSdJV5znQge5+4Es9iZCN9bliEYV2f4+ZPyrvV5mxG1Ti7aFScW6vqZjK JAr1Ng08iPZ6aJCmh5frUTd2sFAsJAMQQZ5ppZPet+aeJIggMgYco/G7aObyGhoaG2zV tJDA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531kOd1DUvafQzzOqqxuOXVnG6M0YleNr8AIh6x2bdcmJYNmzkDe 6Kxk40bn/tWwNq0RpKaqKBJZ/kMfJ70yAUg0VUvY8FiLwcqyxy9WY1z4jlm9fO58C9n38zfz8Mc tVhrVdOCXSm7EzcIK07ud+A== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:14d3:b0:325:ed6b:e748 with SMTP id f19-20020a05680814d300b00325ed6be748mr2683336oiw.105.1651609267935; Tue, 03 May 2022 13:21:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwKRbb5OLkMV2UmDQ1VLpoVhTPJwDt2cIVnFXrIsYyzxEIudxX/SPJKn8BJ62U+FH4qM5Vz5Q== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6808:14d3:b0:325:ed6b:e748 with SMTP id f19-20020a05680814d300b00325ed6be748mr2683301oiw.105.1651609267392; Tue, 03 May 2022 13:21:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.10.69.234] ([8.34.116.185]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w11-20020a4adecb000000b0035eb4e5a6cesm5328939oou.36.2022.05.03.13.21.04 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 03 May 2022 13:21:06 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <2bb92a84-18f4-d007-9465-fdc19f6f1c86@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 3 May 2022 22:21:03 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-coco@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.8.0 Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 02/12] mm: Add support for unaccepted memory To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Borislav Petkov , Andy Lutomirski , Sean Christopherson , Andrew Morton , Joerg Roedel , Ard Biesheuvel Cc: Andi Kleen , Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan , David Rientjes , Vlastimil Babka , Tom Lendacky , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , Paolo Bonzini , Ingo Molnar , Varad Gautam , Dario Faggioli , Dave Hansen , Brijesh Singh , Mike Rapoport , x86@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Rapoport References: <20220425033934.68551-1-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20220425033934.68551-3-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat In-Reply-To: <20220425033934.68551-3-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=david@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > +/* > + * Page acceptance can be very slow. Do not call under critical locks. > + */ > +static void accept_page(struct page *page, unsigned int order) > +{ > + phys_addr_t start = page_to_phys(page); > + int i; > + > + accept_memory(start, start + (PAGE_SIZE << order)); > + > + for (i = 0; i < (1 << order); i++) { > + if (PageUnaccepted(page + i)) > + __ClearPageUnaccepted(page + i); > + } > +} What was the rationale of leaving PageUnaccepted() set on sub-pages when merging pages? I'd just clear the flag when merging and avoid the loop here. You could even assert here that we don't have any PageUnaccepted() on tail pages. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb