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=-15.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, 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 28924C433DB for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 18:26:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from desiato.infradead.org (desiato.infradead.org [90.155.92.199]) (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 A63B96509F for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 18:26:38 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A63B96509F 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=desiato.20200630; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:Cc:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=KZQVj1QkgW5cadWNvrOOMb40uVv4vkkj9XSk40m80lE=; b=UGvtolDhlNZwyEq5+Kp4fIFhE b6kvh0R9TbcpJRSwDD+VlK5Gh+WqkdGAW6X6LY3zRwh9421bM8xVv15Gd+K6umLjz3PPUcDcRGw3Y BANlmDv1sasFVHA2KyJJZeqfq+h6PyV+E9oouNyAf2fI4GSKjedEoF8d3qzOzFXhIeul3KGYSpH5F +FFwoKsIgKeDV6i+mbmJV2J1OuvEbMNRhk1CghHZjn+DiiX/brYREo1TW0XSm4vmXBa6I+feiV8vB TL5sknKetlLbMyvx13t80yeVlsoz4EqKoPcBhXUvOHG+xbCWL4T7e5GqEjoTdG7n3TlY36YkX8nc3 WxD4kuWyw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=desiato.infradead.org) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lIF86-00FxIE-1y; Fri, 05 Mar 2021 18:24:50 +0000 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1lIF7v-00FxG1-NY for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 05 Mar 2021 18:24:42 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1614968678; 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=sNT9fJ85J6oSGdxkAJMQPYTV29ndRMM0I5qlalEdePA=; b=XnVi1x3RvpNA6p41b49VfdAFlggSHp5B/IKk5JOip460pYL9qmBrCxgObKooVaGCxfeMRo Y2aMK1whpfOASUz6AqN5PXoSFCiUys6Hz1nURWCradzYtNBAuu0C3+XzZWLIK0U28pJ+Qk Mjy8HNecWf/SaBi9Hm0FqGZlsuA+8ng= 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-191-2JW58ZZ-Nb21e_7MNxD95g-1; Fri, 05 Mar 2021 13:24:34 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 2JW58ZZ-Nb21e_7MNxD95g-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 9377D760C1; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 18:24:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.112.194] (ovpn-112-194.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.194]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9B551F456; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 18:24:21 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] arm64/mm: Fix pfn_valid() for ZONE_DEVICE based memory To: Catalin Marinas , Anshuman Khandual Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Will Deacon , Ard Biesheuvel , Mark Rutland , James Morse , Robin Murphy , =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgR2xpc3Nl?= , Dan Williams , Mike Rapoport , Veronika Kabatova References: <1614921898-4099-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <1614921898-4099-2-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20210305181322.GI23855@arm.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 19:24:21 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210305181322.GI23855@arm.com> 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-20210305_182440_743787_1A4BD214 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 26.02 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 05.03.21 19:13, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 10:54:57AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> pfn_valid() validates a pfn but basically it checks for a valid struct page >> backing for that pfn. It should always return positive for memory ranges >> backed with struct page mapping. But currently pfn_valid() fails for all >> ZONE_DEVICE based memory types even though they have struct page mapping. >> >> pfn_valid() asserts that there is a memblock entry for a given pfn without >> MEMBLOCK_NOMAP flag being set. The problem with ZONE_DEVICE based memory is >> that they do not have memblock entries. Hence memblock_is_map_memory() will >> invariably fail via memblock_search() for a ZONE_DEVICE based address. This >> eventually fails pfn_valid() which is wrong. memblock_is_map_memory() needs >> to be skipped for such memory ranges. As ZONE_DEVICE memory gets hotplugged >> into the system via memremap_pages() called from a driver, their respective >> memory sections will not have SECTION_IS_EARLY set. >> >> Normal hotplug memory will never have MEMBLOCK_NOMAP set in their memblock >> regions. Because the flag MEMBLOCK_NOMAP was specifically designed and set >> for firmware reserved memory regions. memblock_is_map_memory() can just be >> skipped as its always going to be positive and that will be an optimization >> for the normal hotplug memory. Like ZONE_DEVICE based memory, all normal >> hotplugged memory too will not have SECTION_IS_EARLY set for their sections >> >> Skipping memblock_is_map_memory() for all non early memory sections would >> fix pfn_valid() problem for ZONE_DEVICE based memory and also improve its >> performance for normal hotplug memory as well. >> >> Cc: Catalin Marinas >> Cc: Will Deacon >> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel >> Cc: Robin Murphy >> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand >> Fixes: 73b20c84d42d ("arm64: mm: implement pte_devmap support") >> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual >> --- >> arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 12 ++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> index 0ace5e68efba..5920c527845a 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> @@ -230,6 +230,18 @@ int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn) >> >> if (!valid_section(__pfn_to_section(pfn))) >> return 0; >> + >> + /* >> + * ZONE_DEVICE memory does not have the memblock entries. >> + * memblock_is_map_memory() check for ZONE_DEVICE based >> + * addresses will always fail. Even the normal hotplugged >> + * memory will never have MEMBLOCK_NOMAP flag set in their >> + * memblock entries. Skip memblock search for all non early >> + * memory sections covering all of hotplug memory including >> + * both normal and ZONE_DEVICE based. >> + */ >> + if (!early_section(__pfn_to_section(pfn))) >> + return pfn_section_valid(__pfn_to_section(pfn), pfn); > > Would something like this work instead: > > if (online_device_section(ms)) > return 1; > > to avoid the assumptions around early_section()? > Please keep online section logic out of pfn valid logic. Tow different things. (and rather not diverge too much from generic pfn_valid() - we want to achieve the opposite in the long term, merging both implementations) -- Thanks, David / dhildenb _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel