From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39209C64E8A for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 12:02:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0B8920872 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 12:02:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730302AbgLCMCf (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Dec 2020 07:02:35 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:54191 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729035AbgLCMCe (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Dec 2020 07:02:34 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1606996867; 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=Xa3xb2moiuKougPYQgCIxOSC16hacVe+/4oGyGlf0T4=; b=PXTf6g9Le6h0mo4hVCC9KuUMZyUhwbHD7N2Gb0Atck03f0I18h4oelYJqx0QdzDMgY7wiS lRjGNbMmGGjRbZjnpNlQYke5sr3sWWq88WLV5DTUepD3MjrDjwUJqj61QhPtP78moA+7V8 tmrUFpUw4HJi/uIkTaVPT+ftmFUwGLQ= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-395-NokD7zRZPviXIiyVeOgD6Q-1; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 07:01:06 -0500 X-MC-Unique: NokD7zRZPviXIiyVeOgD6Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08447A0C04; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 12:01:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.113.250] (ovpn-113-250.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.250]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58E7B27C40; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 12:01:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [RFC V2 3/3] s390/mm: Define arch_get_mappable_range() To: Heiko Carstens , Anshuman Khandual Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vasily Gorbik References: <1606706992-26656-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <1606706992-26656-4-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20201202203233.GB11274@osiris> <24905c32-f6c1-97a0-000f-f822b9870ea5@arm.com> <20201203115133.GB9994@osiris> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: <4d6c9ec4-f1be-46b9-5d67-5c53f5afedc5@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 13:01:01 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201203115133.GB9994@osiris> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03.12.20 12:51, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 06:03:00AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/extmem.c b/arch/s390/mm/extmem.c >>>> index 5060956b8e7d..cc055a78f7b6 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/s390/mm/extmem.c >>>> +++ b/arch/s390/mm/extmem.c >>>> @@ -337,6 +337,11 @@ __segment_load (char *name, int do_nonshared, unsigned long *addr, unsigned long >>>> goto out_free_resource; >>>> } >>>> >>>> + if (seg->end + 1 > VMEM_MAX_PHYS || seg->end + 1 < seg->start_addr) { >>>> + rc = -ERANGE; >>>> + goto out_resource; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> rc = vmem_add_mapping(seg->start_addr, seg->end - seg->start_addr + 1); >>>> if (rc) >>>> goto out_resource; >>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c b/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c >>>> index b239f2ba93b0..06dddcc0ce06 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c >>>> +++ b/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c >>>> @@ -532,14 +532,19 @@ void vmem_remove_mapping(unsigned long start, unsigned long size) >>>> mutex_unlock(&vmem_mutex); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +struct range arch_get_mappable_range(void) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct range memhp_range; >>>> + >>>> + memhp_range.start = 0; >>>> + memhp_range.end = VMEM_MAX_PHYS; >>>> + return memhp_range; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> int vmem_add_mapping(unsigned long start, unsigned long size) >>>> { >>>> int ret; >>>> >>>> - if (start + size > VMEM_MAX_PHYS || >>>> - start + size < start) >>>> - return -ERANGE; >>>> - >>> >>> I really fail to see how this could be considered an improvement for >>> s390. Especially I do not like that the (central) range check is now >>> moved to the caller (__segment_load). Which would mean potential >>> additional future callers would have to duplicate that code as well. >> >> The physical range check is being moved to the generic hotplug code >> via arch_get_mappable_range() instead, making the existing check in >> vmem_add_mapping() redundant. Dropping the check there necessitates >> adding back a similar check in __segment_load(). Otherwise there >> will be a loss of functionality in terms of range check. >> >> May be we could just keep this existing check in vmem_add_mapping() >> as well in order avoid this movement but then it would be redundant >> check in every hotplug path. >> >> So I guess the choice is to either have redundant range checks in >> all hotplug paths or future internal callers of vmem_add_mapping() >> take care of the range check. > > The problem I have with this current approach from an architecture > perspective: we end up having two completely different methods which > are doing the same and must be kept in sync. This might be obvious > looking at this patch, but I'm sure this will go out-of-sync (aka > broken) sooner or later. Exactly, there should be one function only that was the whole idea of arch_get_mappable_range(). > > Therefore I would really like to see a single method to do the range > checking. Maybe you could add a callback into architecture code, so > that such an architecture specific function could also be used > elsewhere. Dunno. > I think we can just switch to using "memhp_range_allowed()" here then after implementing arch_get_mappable_range(). Doesn't hurt to double check in vmem_add_mapping() - especially to keep extmem working without changes. At least for callers of memory hotplug it's then clear which values actually won't fail deep down in arch code. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84599C63777 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 12:02:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2014B20872 for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 12:02:35 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2014B20872 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=1iKpAHrpnruXY8jqHoyxkkpdxgpuSVb0bdUHvLwu0cs=; b=PSAsztahPqWom8uIIQFKomKQ6 g6z4+00C0Uf3YdrdrTTOk27vfyemLi3l6tLg5jRlA+9rPiaO6xogM/aXHLyvR7+dUAdCROUpcejqE NSyl+EMALnmPjXpoYxwO8caUjPgyAY/bWpjRJ3RmGBt2hZcKwLZ61hUEvRxtSXdn1gGZX1SjOEAx2 B9aKzxGDimq7jBonjosOf/w3RRSWf/NtlsQCnEqS7kRtXh3Hu9YGP24shYRrYOjcbeyYmDPGseIKc BFVjGZpQ9sLi1c2f4l+nQ4bPtwcsVU8GeQErEhxnleZEsrZQe8dFSvvFq6AoCL4T0OnhES3aBwFp/ VhQOwGCTw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kknIM-0007Sr-Tm; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 12:01:10 +0000 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kknIK-0007SX-NC for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 12:01:09 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1606996867; 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=Xa3xb2moiuKougPYQgCIxOSC16hacVe+/4oGyGlf0T4=; b=PXTf6g9Le6h0mo4hVCC9KuUMZyUhwbHD7N2Gb0Atck03f0I18h4oelYJqx0QdzDMgY7wiS lRjGNbMmGGjRbZjnpNlQYke5sr3sWWq88WLV5DTUepD3MjrDjwUJqj61QhPtP78moA+7V8 tmrUFpUw4HJi/uIkTaVPT+ftmFUwGLQ= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-395-NokD7zRZPviXIiyVeOgD6Q-1; Thu, 03 Dec 2020 07:01:06 -0500 X-MC-Unique: NokD7zRZPviXIiyVeOgD6Q-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08447A0C04; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 12:01:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.113.250] (ovpn-113-250.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.250]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58E7B27C40; Thu, 3 Dec 2020 12:01:02 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [RFC V2 3/3] s390/mm: Define arch_get_mappable_range() To: Heiko Carstens , Anshuman Khandual References: <1606706992-26656-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <1606706992-26656-4-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20201202203233.GB11274@osiris> <24905c32-f6c1-97a0-000f-f822b9870ea5@arm.com> <20201203115133.GB9994@osiris> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: <4d6c9ec4-f1be-46b9-5d67-5c53f5afedc5@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 13:01:01 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201203115133.GB9994@osiris> Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201203_070108_829417_E6D9AAF1 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 27.06 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Vasily Gorbik , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 03.12.20 12:51, Heiko Carstens wrote: > On Thu, Dec 03, 2020 at 06:03:00AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/extmem.c b/arch/s390/mm/extmem.c >>>> index 5060956b8e7d..cc055a78f7b6 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/s390/mm/extmem.c >>>> +++ b/arch/s390/mm/extmem.c >>>> @@ -337,6 +337,11 @@ __segment_load (char *name, int do_nonshared, unsigned long *addr, unsigned long >>>> goto out_free_resource; >>>> } >>>> >>>> + if (seg->end + 1 > VMEM_MAX_PHYS || seg->end + 1 < seg->start_addr) { >>>> + rc = -ERANGE; >>>> + goto out_resource; >>>> + } >>>> + >>>> rc = vmem_add_mapping(seg->start_addr, seg->end - seg->start_addr + 1); >>>> if (rc) >>>> goto out_resource; >>>> diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c b/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c >>>> index b239f2ba93b0..06dddcc0ce06 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c >>>> +++ b/arch/s390/mm/vmem.c >>>> @@ -532,14 +532,19 @@ void vmem_remove_mapping(unsigned long start, unsigned long size) >>>> mutex_unlock(&vmem_mutex); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +struct range arch_get_mappable_range(void) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct range memhp_range; >>>> + >>>> + memhp_range.start = 0; >>>> + memhp_range.end = VMEM_MAX_PHYS; >>>> + return memhp_range; >>>> +} >>>> + >>>> int vmem_add_mapping(unsigned long start, unsigned long size) >>>> { >>>> int ret; >>>> >>>> - if (start + size > VMEM_MAX_PHYS || >>>> - start + size < start) >>>> - return -ERANGE; >>>> - >>> >>> I really fail to see how this could be considered an improvement for >>> s390. Especially I do not like that the (central) range check is now >>> moved to the caller (__segment_load). Which would mean potential >>> additional future callers would have to duplicate that code as well. >> >> The physical range check is being moved to the generic hotplug code >> via arch_get_mappable_range() instead, making the existing check in >> vmem_add_mapping() redundant. Dropping the check there necessitates >> adding back a similar check in __segment_load(). Otherwise there >> will be a loss of functionality in terms of range check. >> >> May be we could just keep this existing check in vmem_add_mapping() >> as well in order avoid this movement but then it would be redundant >> check in every hotplug path. >> >> So I guess the choice is to either have redundant range checks in >> all hotplug paths or future internal callers of vmem_add_mapping() >> take care of the range check. > > The problem I have with this current approach from an architecture > perspective: we end up having two completely different methods which > are doing the same and must be kept in sync. This might be obvious > looking at this patch, but I'm sure this will go out-of-sync (aka > broken) sooner or later. Exactly, there should be one function only that was the whole idea of arch_get_mappable_range(). > > Therefore I would really like to see a single method to do the range > checking. Maybe you could add a callback into architecture code, so > that such an architecture specific function could also be used > elsewhere. Dunno. > I think we can just switch to using "memhp_range_allowed()" here then after implementing arch_get_mappable_range(). Doesn't hurt to double check in vmem_add_mapping() - especially to keep extmem working without changes. At least for callers of memory hotplug it's then clear which values actually won't fail deep down in arch code. -- Thanks, David / dhildenb _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel