linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/8] drivers: add Contiguous Memory Allocator

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 12 Jul 2011 15:39:31 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	"Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...eaurora.org>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, Mel Gorman <mel@....ul.ie>,
	Chunsang Jeong <chunsang.jeong@...aro.org>,
	Jesse Barker <jesse.barker@...aro.org>,
	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com>,
	linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>,
	Ankita Garg <ankita@...ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] drivers: add Contiguous Memory Allocator

On Friday 08 July 2011, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 03:58:39PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> 
> > If I'm reading your "ARM: DMA: steal memory for DMA coherent mappings"
> > correctly, the idea is to have a per-platform compile-time amount
> > of memory that is reserved purely for coherent allocations and
> > taking out of the buddy allocator, right?
> 
> Yes, because every time I've looked at taking out memory mappings in
> the first level page tables, it's always been a major issue.
> 
> We have a method where we can remove first level mappings on
> uniprocessor systems in the ioremap code just fine - we use that so
> that systems can setup section and supersection mappings.  They can
> tear them down as well - and we update other tasks L1 page tables
> when they get switched in.
> 
> This, however, doesn't work on SMP, because if you have a DMA allocation
> (which is permitted from IRQ context) you must have some way of removing
> the L1 page table entries from all CPUs TLBs and the page tables currently
> in use and any future page tables which those CPUs may switch to.

Ah, interesting. So there is no tlb flush broadcast operation and it
always goes through IPI?

> So, in a SMP system, there is no safe way to remove L1 page table entries
> from IRQ context.  That means if memory is mapped for the buddy allocators
> using L1 page table entries, then it is fixed for that application on a
> SMP system.

Ok. Can we limit GFP_ATOMIC to memory that doesn't need to be remapped then?
I guess we can assume that there is no regression if we just skip
the dma_alloc_contiguous step in dma_alloc_coherent for any atomic
callers and immediately fall back to the regular allocator.

Unfortunately, this still means we have to keep both methods. I was
hoping that with CMA doing dynamic remapping there would be no need for
keeping a significant number of pages reserved for this.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/