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=-10.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham 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 07DAEC433ED for ; Fri, 14 May 2021 10:59:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7C9B6145A for ; Fri, 14 May 2021 10:59:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231839AbhENLAR (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 May 2021 07:00:17 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:50876 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230506AbhENLAQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 May 2021 07:00:16 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 682706143D; Fri, 14 May 2021 10:59:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 11:59:02 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Anshuman Khandual Cc: Mark Rutland , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Will Deacon , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/mm: Remove [PUD|PMD]_TABLE_BIT from [pud|pmd]_bad() Message-ID: <20210514105901.GC855@arm.com> References: <1620644871-26280-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20210510144337.GA92897@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> <4a36d7b7-6b27-31cc-d701-ebe3c6e4946e@arm.com> <20210511140708.GC8933@C02TD0UTHF1T.local> <8023de56-e6d5-8df0-9920-35fe7dbde640@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8023de56-e6d5-8df0-9920-35fe7dbde640@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 13, 2021 at 10:44:04AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 5/11/21 7:37 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > On Tue, May 11, 2021 at 09:21:46AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > >> On 5/10/21 8:13 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > >>> On Mon, May 10, 2021 at 04:37:51PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > >>>> Semantics wise, [pud|pmd]_bad() have always implied that a given [PUD|PMD] > >>>> entry does not have a pointer to the next level page table. This had been > >>>> made clear in the commit a1c76574f345 ("arm64: mm: use *_sect to check for > >>>> section maps"). Hence explicitly check for a table entry rather than just > >>>> testing a single bit. This basically redefines [pud|pmd]_bad() in terms of > >>>> [pud|pmd]_table() making the semantics clear. > >>>> > >>>> Cc: Catalin Marinas > >>>> Cc: Will Deacon > >>>> Cc: Mark Rutland > >>>> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > >>>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > >>>> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual > >>> > >>> I have no strong feelings either way, so: > >>> > >>> Acked-by: Mark Rutland > >>> > >>> ... that said, I think that the "bad" naming is unclear and misleading, > >>> and it'd be really nice if we could clean that up treewide with > >>> something clearer than "bad". > >> > >> Agreed, the name is misleading. > >> > >>> It does seem that would roughly fit p??_leaf() if we had > >> > >> But what if the platform does not support huge page aka leaf mapping > >> at the given level ? Also a non table i.e bad entry might not always > >> mean a leaf/section/huge page mapping, it could simply imply that the > >> entry is not just pointing to next level and might be just in an bad > >> intermediate or invalid state. > > > > Ah, so that's also covering swap entries, too? It's not entirely clear > > to me what "bad intermediate or invalid state" means, because I assume > > it's not arbitrary junk or this wouldn't be sound genrally. > > Intermediate states like swap, migration or probably even splitting THP. > Though I am not really sure whether pxx_bad() only gets used for valid > table or leaf entries i.e things which are mapped. Hence checking just > for non table entry is better and even safer, than looking out for what > other states the entry could be in. I had a quick look through some of the uses and it seems the expectation is that after a !pmd_bad(), the pmd is a table. The checks for migration, huge page etc. are prior to the pmd_bad() check. For this patch: Acked-by: Catalin Marinas