From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Chris Goldsworthy <quic_cgoldswo@quicinc.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Sudarshan Rajagopalan <quic_sudaraja@quicinc.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] arm64: mm: update max_pfn after memory hotplug
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 14:09:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <130a50d7-92fd-31fa-261e-f73dadcb4fcf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210929110339.GA21510@willie-the-truck>
On 29.09.21 13:03, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 12:49:58PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 29.09.21 12:42, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 12:29:32PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>> On 29.09.21 12:10, Will Deacon wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 03:54:48PM -0700, Chris Goldsworthy wrote:
>>>>>> From: Sudarshan Rajagopalan <quic_sudaraja@quicinc.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After new memory blocks have been hotplugged, max_pfn and max_low_pfn
>>>>>> needs updating to reflect on new PFNs being hot added to system.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sudarshan Rajagopalan <quic_sudaraja@quicinc.com>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Chris Goldsworthy <quic_cgoldswo@quicinc.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 5 +++++
>>>>>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>>>>>> index cfd9deb..fd85b51 100644
>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
>>>>>> @@ -1499,6 +1499,11 @@ int arch_add_memory(int nid, u64 start, u64 size,
>>>>>> if (ret)
>>>>>> __remove_pgd_mapping(swapper_pg_dir,
>>>>>> __phys_to_virt(start), size);
>>>>>> + else {
>>>>>> + max_pfn = PFN_UP(start + size);
>>>>>> + max_low_pfn = max_pfn;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>
>>>>> We use 'max_pfn' as part of the argument to set_max_mapnr(). Does that need
>>>>> updating as well?
>>>>>
>>>>> Do we have sufficient locking to ensure nobody is looking at max_pfn or
>>>>> max_low_pfn while we update them?
>>>>
>>>> Only the write side is protected by memory hotplug locking. The read side is
>>>> lockless -- just like all of the other pfn_to_online_page() machinery.
>>>
>>> Hmm. So the readers can see one of the variables updated but the other one
>>> stale?
>>
>> Yes, just like it has been on x86-64 for a long time:
>>
>> arch/x86/mm/init_64.c:update_end_of_memory_vars()
>>
>> Not sure if anyone really cares about slightly delayed updates while memory
>> is getting hotplugged. The users that I am aware of don't care.
>
> Thanks, I'd missed that x86 also updates max_low_pfn. So at least we're not
> worse off in that respect.
>
> Looking at set_max_mapnr(), I'm wondering why we need to call that at all
> on arm64 as 'max_mapnr' only seems to be used for nommu.
I think max_mapnr is only helpful without SPARSE, I can spot the most
prominent consumer being simplistic pfn_valid() implementation.
MEMORY_HOTPLUG on arm64 implies SPARSE. ... and I recall that FLATMEM is
no longer possible on arm64. So most probably the arm64 call of
set_max_mapnr() can just be dropped.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-29 12:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-23 22:54 [RFC] arm64: mm: update max_pfn after memory hotplug Chris Goldsworthy
2021-09-23 22:54 ` Chris Goldsworthy
2021-09-24 2:47 ` Florian Fainelli
2021-09-24 8:17 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-09-24 20:52 ` Chris Goldsworthy
2021-09-27 15:51 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-09-27 23:22 ` Georgi Djakov
2021-09-28 6:12 ` Chris Goldsworthy
2021-09-28 7:33 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-09-27 17:22 ` Georgi Djakov
2021-09-27 17:34 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-09-27 20:00 ` Georgi Djakov
2021-09-27 20:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-09-29 10:10 ` Will Deacon
2021-09-29 10:29 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-09-29 10:42 ` Will Deacon
2021-09-29 10:49 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-09-29 11:03 ` Will Deacon
2021-09-29 12:09 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2021-09-29 12:51 ` Will Deacon
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=130a50d7-92fd-31fa-261e-f73dadcb4fcf@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=quic_cgoldswo@quicinc.com \
--cc=quic_sudaraja@quicinc.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).