Re: [PATCH 05/10] xen/arm: introduce alloc_staticmem_pages

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>]

On 18.05.2021 07:21, Penny Zheng wrote:
> alloc_staticmem_pages is designated to allocate nr_pfns contiguous
> pages of static memory. And it is the equivalent of alloc_heap_pages
> for static memory.
> This commit only covers allocating at specified starting address.
> 
> For each page, it shall check if the page is reserved
> (PGC_reserved) and free. It shall also do a set of necessary
> initialization, which are mostly the same ones in alloc_heap_pages,
> like, following the same cache-coherency policy and turning page
> status into PGC_state_used, etc.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Penny Zheng <penny.zheng@arm.com>
> ---
>  xen/common/page_alloc.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 64 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/xen/common/page_alloc.c b/xen/common/page_alloc.c
> index 58b53c6ac2..adf2889e76 100644
> --- a/xen/common/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/xen/common/page_alloc.c
> @@ -1068,6 +1068,70 @@ static struct page_info *alloc_heap_pages(
>      return pg;
>  }
>  
> +/*
> + * Allocate nr_pfns contiguous pages, starting at #start, of static memory.
> + * It is the equivalent of alloc_heap_pages for static memory
> + */
> +static struct page_info *alloc_staticmem_pages(unsigned long nr_pfns,
> +                                                paddr_t start,
> +                                                unsigned int memflags)

This is surely breaking the build (at this point in the series -
recall that a series should build fine at every patch boundary),
for introducing an unused static function, which most compilers
will warn about.

Also again - please avoid introducing code that's always dead for
certain architectures. Quite likely you want a Kconfig option to
put a suitable #ifdef around such functions.

And a nit: Please correct the apparently off-by-one indentation.

> +{
> +    bool need_tlbflush = false;
> +    uint32_t tlbflush_timestamp = 0;
> +    unsigned int i;

This variable's type should (again) match nr_pfns'es (albeit I
think that parameter really wants to be nr_mfns).

> +    struct page_info *pg;
> +    mfn_t s_mfn;
> +
> +    /* For now, it only supports allocating at specified address. */
> +    s_mfn = maddr_to_mfn(start);
> +    pg = mfn_to_page(s_mfn);
> +    if ( !pg )
> +        return NULL;

Under what conditions would mfn_to_page() return NULL?

> +    for ( i = 0; i < nr_pfns; i++)
> +    {
> +        /*
> +         * Reference count must continuously be zero for free pages
> +         * of static memory(PGC_reserved).
> +         */
> +        ASSERT(pg[i].count_info & PGC_reserved);
> +        if ( (pg[i].count_info & ~PGC_reserved) != PGC_state_free )
> +        {
> +            printk(XENLOG_ERR
> +                    "Reference count must continuously be zero for free pages"
> +                    "pg[%u] MFN %"PRI_mfn" c=%#lx t=%#x\n",
> +                    i, mfn_x(page_to_mfn(pg + i)),
> +                    pg[i].count_info, pg[i].tlbflush_timestamp);

Nit: Indentation again.

> +            BUG();
> +        }
> +
> +        if ( !(memflags & MEMF_no_tlbflush) )
> +            accumulate_tlbflush(&need_tlbflush, &pg[i],
> +                                &tlbflush_timestamp);
> +
> +        /*
> +         * Reserve flag PGC_reserved and change page state

DYM "Preserve ..."?

> +         * to PGC_state_inuse.
> +         */
> +        pg[i].count_info = (pg[i].count_info & PGC_reserved) | PGC_state_inuse;
> +        /* Initialise fields which have other uses for free pages. */
> +        pg[i].u.inuse.type_info = 0;
> +        page_set_owner(&pg[i], NULL);
> +
> +        /*
> +         * Ensure cache and RAM are consistent for platforms where the
> +         * guest can control its own visibility of/through the cache.
> +         */
> +        flush_page_to_ram(mfn_x(page_to_mfn(&pg[i])),
> +                            !(memflags & MEMF_no_icache_flush));
> +    }
> +
> +    if ( need_tlbflush )
> +        filtered_flush_tlb_mask(tlbflush_timestamp);

With reserved pages dedicated to a specific domain, in how far is it
possible that stale mappings from a prior use can still be around,
making such TLB flushing necessary?

Jan