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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no 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 9E648C433E1 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 22:08:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 778F720855 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 22:08:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="D1boRI8f" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726641AbgHUWHz (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Aug 2020 18:07:55 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.81]:31814 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726758AbgHUWHx (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Aug 2020 18:07:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1598047670; 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=DkSg3luBHRm0cvkVLNBpsnCZK9HVFB0m9kyx8QwK1QI=; b=D1boRI8f1KQoX0JCm2r9cyKTuCaenilBvXSEGa0O9Rwz6ikzFweyi3ytHipSP9Mr/XEYj7 /eDZnEM0ON2XCrd8XAVWynvEnuUGTXWE4IPp8RuLFw26m66QEpw/gvS4pEWvfiu2Cq9RCs 2ITMpxNkQkKUTa6XjzWR375c+SKCdHM= Received: from mail-ej1-f70.google.com (mail-ej1-f70.google.com [209.85.218.70]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-523-WgD7ThjVNlqRvE2k-uWqOQ-1; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 18:07:48 -0400 X-MC-Unique: WgD7ThjVNlqRvE2k-uWqOQ-1 Received: by mail-ej1-f70.google.com with SMTP id e22so1265214ejx.18 for ; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 15:07:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=DkSg3luBHRm0cvkVLNBpsnCZK9HVFB0m9kyx8QwK1QI=; b=ooN/GPFmg089ZiznOJcQWVTu4Y6Yv2ZpsNBAzFhp+G4Uoil9wqo2z9rMax1ZhUpaG9 +P/1sQjnLwOluk2zPSzWkQYJWQqK32vOKkOIympBhTS9M/Sgw53/5tgKvVvuS/XelSss TT1qEuVoEn511KZehzKDq9YlyM6o171HGvxJ3g71/0m8IoGHTu/eNSyJSWmyxmEvYUYY 0a8JrVI5ClE89KP9ztwlBtFAVilnigBlshqYMCF7/c9F/Z7FeHpQRh9Uhurr9dJEKZJM /RV9o0yq4T3IVFCUaQgVrSNAibBvpkxUUfgl3hgWOObNwagHNiCP6UAxtlc1fKR7LAnI NkPA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5334dW443bSBMJaVVDdCKsmvPwHW/tCaISiXIQEQo1xzvFX3XCIg TJjNfHRrqPOXmxhLMe5y09GiUCXBhqCl+nS6E5QPaMS770vQwbdWAO1HVFSLt4xAjQt3GafMemm xPoCYWcbWECNoBPf1/8nPQA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:2a04:: with SMTP id j4mr5244879eje.440.1598047667320; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 15:07:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwhvJaQ8AyV/ONfuc3qKwQ/zzerkQ6ZDcGPqYKrvzzg0K+cbZJ1cq8ZccJ0IrDrvfkZ/kgetQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:2a04:: with SMTP id j4mr5244849eje.440.1598047667115; Fri, 21 Aug 2020 15:07:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.3.122] (p5b0c6231.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [91.12.98.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id zc8sm181245ejb.103.2020.08.21.15.07.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 21 Aug 2020 15:07:46 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: David Hildenbrand Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/23] device-dax: Support sub-dividing soft-reserved ranges Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2020 23:43:50 +0200 Message-Id: References: <646DDE9B-90C2-493A-958C-90EFA1CCA475@redhat.com> Cc: Andrew Morton , Ira Weiny , Ard Biesheuvel , Mike Rapoport , Borislav Petkov , Vishal Verma , David Airlie , Will Deacon , Catalin Marinas , Ard Biesheuvel , Joao Martins , Tom Lendacky , Dave Jiang , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Jonathan Cameron , Wei Yang , X86 ML , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Pavel Tatashin , Peter Zijlstra , Ben Skeggs , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Jason Gunthorpe , Jia He , Ingo Molnar , Dave Hansen , Paul Mackerras , Brice Goglin , Jeff Moyer , Michael Ellerman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Daniel Vetter , Andy Lutomirski , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux MM , linux-nvdimm , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux ACPI , Maling list - DRI developers In-Reply-To: <646DDE9B-90C2-493A-958C-90EFA1CCA475@redhat.com> To: Dan Williams X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (17G68) Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org > Am 21.08.2020 um 23:34 schrieb David Hildenbrand : >=20 > =EF=BB=BF >=20 >>> Am 21.08.2020 um 23:17 schrieb Dan Williams : >>>=20 >>> =EF=BB=BFOn Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 11:30 AM David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>=20 >>>> On 21.08.20 20:27, Dan Williams wrote: >>>> On Fri, Aug 21, 2020 at 3:15 AM David Hildenbrand wr= ote: >>>>>=20 >>>>>>>=20 >>>>>>> 1. On x86-64, e820 indicates "soft-reserved" memory. This memory is n= ot >>>>>>> automatically used in the buddy during boot, but remains untouched >>>>>>> (similar to pmem). But as it involves ACPI as well, it could also be= >>>>>>> used on arm64 (-e820), correct? >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Correct, arm64 also gets the EFI support for enumerating memory this >>>>>> way. However, I would clarify that whether soft-reserved is given to >>>>>> the buddy allocator by default or not is the kernel's policy choice, >>>>>> "buddy-by-default" is ok and is what will happen anyways with older >>>>>> kernels on platforms that enumerate a memory range this way. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Is "soft-reserved" then the right terminology for that? It sounds very= >>>>> x86-64/e820 specific. Maybe a compressed for of "performance >>>>> differentiated memory" might be a better fit to expose to user space, n= o? >>>>=20 >>>> No. The EFI "Specific Purpose" bit is an attribute independent of >>>> e820, it's x86-Linux that entangles those together. There is no >>>> requirement for platform firmware to use that designation even for >>>> drastic performance differentiation between ranges, and conversely >>>> there is no requirement that memory *with* that designation has any >>>> performance difference compared to the default memory pool. So it >>>> really is a reservation policy about a memory range to keep out of the >>>> buddy allocator by default. >>>=20 >>> Okay, still "soft-reserved" is x86-64 specific, no? >>=20 >> There's nothing preventing other EFI archs, or a similar designation >> in another firmware spec, picking up this policy. >>=20 >>> (AFAIK, >>> "soft-reserved" will be visible in /proc/iomem, or am I confusing >>> stuff?) >>=20 >> No, you're correct. >>=20 >>> IOW, it "performance differentiated" is not universally >>> applicable, maybe "specific purpose memory" is ? >>=20 >> Those bikeshed colors don't seem an improvement to me. >>=20 >> "Soft-reserved" actually tells you something about the kernel policy >> for the memory. The criticism of "specific purpose" that led to >> calling it "soft-reserved" in Linux is the fact that "specific" is >> undefined as far as the firmware knows, and "specific" may have >> different applications based on the platform user. "Soft-reserved" >> like "Reserved" tells you that a driver policy might be in play for >> that memory. >>=20 >> Also note that the current color of the bikeshed has already shipped sinc= e v5.5: >>=20 >> 262b45ae3ab4 x86/efi: EFI soft reservation to E820 enumeration >>=20 >=20 > I was asking because I was struggling to even understand what =E2=80=9Esof= t-reserved=E2=80=9C is and I could bet most people have no clue what that is= supposed to be. >=20 > In contrast =E2=80=9Epersistent memory=E2=80=9C or =E2=80=9Especial purpos= e memory=E2=80=9C in /proc/iomem is something normal (Linux using) human bei= ngs can understand. Obviously s/normal/most/ Cheers!=