From: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com> To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: "Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>, "Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>, "Ard Biesheuvel" <ardb@kernel.org>, "Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@arm.com>, "James Morse" <james.morse@arm.com>, "Robin Murphy" <robin.murphy@arm.com>, "Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>, "Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>, "Mike Rapoport" <rppt@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64/mm: Reorganize pfn_valid() Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2021 09:17:47 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <681dd64b-e10a-1ec8-abad-d3eee0ddfa45@arm.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <9050792c-feba-1b72-681e-ebc28fc1fcc5@redhat.com> On 1/29/21 3:37 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 29.01.21 08:39, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> There are multiple instances of pfn_to_section_nr() and __pfn_to_section() >> when CONFIG_SPARSEMEM is enabled. This can be just optimized if the memory >> section is fetched earlier. Hence bifurcate pfn_valid() into two different >> definitions depending on whether CONFIG_SPARSEMEM is enabled. Also replace >> the open coded pfn <--> addr conversion with __[pfn|phys]_to_[phys|pfn](). >> This does not cause any functional change. >> >> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> >> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> >> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org> >> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com> >> --- >> arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> index 1141075e4d53..09adca90c57a 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> @@ -217,18 +217,25 @@ static void __init zone_sizes_init(unsigned long min, unsigned long max) >> free_area_init(max_zone_pfns); >> } >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM >> int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn) >> { >> - phys_addr_t addr = pfn << PAGE_SHIFT; >> + struct mem_section *ms = __pfn_to_section(pfn); >> + phys_addr_t addr = __pfn_to_phys(pfn); > > I'd just use PFN_PHYS() here, which is more frequently used in the kernel. Sure, will replace. > >> - if ((addr >> PAGE_SHIFT) != pfn) >> + /* >> + * Ensure the upper PAGE_SHIFT bits are clear in the >> + * pfn. Else it might lead to false positives when >> + * some of the upper bits are set, but the lower bits >> + * match a valid pfn. >> + */ >> + if (__phys_to_pfn(addr) != pfn) > > and here PHYS_PFN(). Comment is helpful. :) Sure, will replace. > >> return 0; >> -#ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM >> if (pfn_to_section_nr(pfn) >= NR_MEM_SECTIONS) >> return 0; >> - if (!valid_section(__pfn_to_section(pfn))) >> + if (!valid_section(ms)) >> return 0; >> /* >> @@ -240,11 +247,28 @@ int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn) >> * 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); >> -#endif >> + if (!early_section(ms)) >> + return pfn_section_valid(ms, pfn); >> + >> return memblock_is_map_memory(addr); >> } >> +#else >> +int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn) >> +{ >> + phys_addr_t addr = __pfn_to_phys(pfn); >> + >> + /* >> + * Ensure the upper PAGE_SHIFT bits are clear in the >> + * pfn. Else it might lead to false positives when >> + * some of the upper bits are set, but the lower bits >> + * match a valid pfn. >> + */ >> + if (__phys_to_pfn(addr) != pfn) >> + return 0; >> + >> + return memblock_is_map_memory(addr); >> +} > > > I think you can avoid duplicating the code by doing something like: Right and also this looks more compact as well. Initially though about it but then was apprehensive about the style in #ifdef { } #endif code block inside the function. After this change, the resulting patch also clears checkpatch.pl test. Will do the change. > > > phys_addr_t addr = PFN_PHYS(pfn); > > if (PHYS_PFN(addr) != pfn) > return 0; > > #ifdef CONFIG_SPARSEMEM > { > struct mem_section *ms = __pfn_to_section(pfn); > > if (!valid_section(ms)) > return 0; > if (!early_section(ms)) > return pfn_section_valid(ms, pfn); > } > #endif > return memblock_is_map_memory(addr); >
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-01 3:47 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2021-01-29 7:39 [PATCH 0/2] arm64/mm: Fix pfn_valid() for ZONE_DEVICE based memory Anshuman Khandual 2021-01-29 7:39 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Anshuman Khandual 2021-01-29 9:58 ` David Hildenbrand 2021-01-29 7:39 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm64/mm: Reorganize pfn_valid() Anshuman Khandual 2021-01-29 10:07 ` David Hildenbrand 2021-02-01 3:47 ` Anshuman Khandual [this message]
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=681dd64b-e10a-1ec8-abad-d3eee0ddfa45@arm.com \ --to=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \ --cc=ardb@kernel.org \ --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \ --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \ --cc=david@redhat.com \ --cc=james.morse@arm.com \ --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \ --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \ --cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=will@kernel.org \ --subject='Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64/mm: Reorganize pfn_valid()' \ /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
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).