From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH 1/3] memblock: update initialization of reserved pages
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2021 23:06:33 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YHdLSeYE3f5+v3n5@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0c48f98c-7454-1458-15a5-cc5a7e1fb7cd@redhat.com>
On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 05:12:11PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 07.04.21 19:26, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> > From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> >
> > The struct pages representing a reserved memory region are initialized
> > using reserve_bootmem_range() function. This function is called for each
> > reserved region just before the memory is freed from memblock to the buddy
> > page allocator.
> >
> > The struct pages for MEMBLOCK_NOMAP regions are kept with the default
> > values set by the memory map initialization which makes it necessary to
> > have a special treatment for such pages in pfn_valid() and
> > pfn_valid_within().
>
> I assume these pages are never given to the buddy, because we don't have a
> direct mapping. So to the kernel, it's essentially just like a memory hole
> with benefits.
The pages should not be accessed as normal memory so they do not have a
direct (or in ARMish linear) mapping and are never given to buddy.
After looking at ACPI standard I don't see a fundamental reason for this
but they've already made this mess and we need to cope with it.
> I can spot that we want to export such memory like any special memory
> thingy/hole in /proc/iomem -- "reserved", which makes sense.
It does, but let's wait with /proc/iomem changes. We don't really have a
100% consistent view of it on different architectures, so adding yet
another type there does not seem, well, urgent.
> I would assume that MEMBLOCK_NOMAP is a special type of *reserved* memory.
> IOW, that for_each_reserved_mem_range() should already succeed on these as
> well -- we should mark anything that is MEMBLOCK_NOMAP implicitly as
> reserved. Or are there valid reasons not to do so? What can anyone do with
> that memory?
>
> I assume they are pretty much useless for the kernel, right? Like other
> reserved memory ranges.
I agree that there is a lot of commonality between NOMAP and reserved. The
problem is that even semantics for reserved is different between
architectures. Moreover, on the same architecture there could be
E820_TYPE_RESERVED and memblock.reserved with different properties.
I'd really prefer moving in baby steps here because any change in the boot
mm can bear several month of early hangs debugging ;-)
> > Split out initialization of the reserved pages to a function with a
> > meaningful name and treat the MEMBLOCK_NOMAP regions the same way as the
> > reserved regions and mark struct pages for the NOMAP regions as
> > PageReserved.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > mm/memblock.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/mm/memblock.c b/mm/memblock.c
> > index afaefa8fc6ab..6b7ea9d86310 100644
> > --- a/mm/memblock.c
> > +++ b/mm/memblock.c
> > @@ -2002,6 +2002,26 @@ static unsigned long __init __free_memory_core(phys_addr_t start,
> > return end_pfn - start_pfn;
> > }
> > +static void __init memmap_init_reserved_pages(void)
> > +{
> > + struct memblock_region *region;
> > + phys_addr_t start, end;
> > + u64 i;
> > +
> > + /* initialize struct pages for the reserved regions */
> > + for_each_reserved_mem_range(i, &start, &end)
> > + reserve_bootmem_region(start, end);
> > +
> > + /* and also treat struct pages for the NOMAP regions as PageReserved */
> > + for_each_mem_region(region) {
> > + if (memblock_is_nomap(region)) {
> > + start = region->base;
> > + end = start + region->size;
> > + reserve_bootmem_region(start, end);
> > + }
> > + }
> > +}
> > +
> > static unsigned long __init free_low_memory_core_early(void)
> > {
> > unsigned long count = 0;
> > @@ -2010,8 +2030,7 @@ static unsigned long __init free_low_memory_core_early(void)
> > memblock_clear_hotplug(0, -1);
> > - for_each_reserved_mem_range(i, &start, &end)
> > - reserve_bootmem_region(start, end);
> > + memmap_init_reserved_pages();
> > /*
> > * We need to use NUMA_NO_NODE instead of NODE_DATA(0)->node_id
--
Sincerely yours,
Mike.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-14 20:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-07 17:26 [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/3] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 1/3] memblock: update initialization of reserved pages Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 5:16 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 5:48 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 15:12 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 15:27 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2021-04-14 15:52 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 20:24 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-15 9:30 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-16 11:44 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-16 11:54 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 20:11 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 20:06 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2021-04-07 17:26 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/3] arm64: decouple check whether pfn is normal memory from pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 5:14 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 6:00 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-14 15:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-14 20:29 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-15 9:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-04-16 11:40 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-07 17:26 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 3/3] arm64: drop pfn_valid_within() and simplify pfn_valid() Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 5:12 ` Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 6:17 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-04-08 5:19 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/3] " Anshuman Khandual
2021-04-08 6:27 ` Mike Rapoport
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=YHdLSeYE3f5+v3n5@kernel.org \
--to=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).