linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Add movablecore

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]
Message-ID: <50B58E30.9060804@huawei.com>
Date:	Wed, 28 Nov 2012 12:08:16 +0800
From:	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...wei.com>
To:	Bob Liu <lliubbo@...il.com>
CC:	Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com>, <hpa@...or.com>,
	<akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <rob@...dley.net>,
	<isimatu.yasuaki@...fujitsu.com>, <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	<wency@...fujitsu.com>, <linfeng@...fujitsu.com>,
	<yinghai@...nel.org>, <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
	<minchan.kim@...il.com>, <mgorman@...e.de>, <rientjes@...gle.com>,
	<rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-mm@...ck.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	<m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Add movablecore_map boot option

On 2012-11-28 11:24, Bob Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 8:49 PM, Tang Chen <tangchen@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>> On 11/27/2012 08:09 PM, Bob Liu wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Tang Chen<tangchen@...fujitsu.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Liu,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This feature is used in memory hotplug.
>>>>
>>>> In order to implement a whole node hotplug, we need to make sure the
>>>> node contains no kernel memory, because memory used by kernel could
>>>> not be migrated. (Since the kernel memory is directly mapped,
>>>> VA = PA + __PAGE_OFFSET. So the physical address could not be changed.)
>>>>
>>>> User could specify all the memory on a node to be movable, so that the
>>>> node could be hot-removed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for your explanation. It's reasonable.
>>>
>>> But i think it's a bit duplicated with CMA, i'm not sure but maybe we
>>> can combine it with CMA which already in mainline?
>>>
>> Hi Liu,
>>
>> Thanks for your advice. :)
>>
>> CMA is Contiguous Memory Allocator, right?  What I'm trying to do is
>> controlling where is the start of ZONE_MOVABLE of each node. Could
>> CMA do this job ?
> 
> cma will not control the start of ZONE_MOVABLE of each node, but it
> can declare a memory that always movable
> and all non movable allocate request will not happen on that area.
> 
> Currently cma use a boot parameter "cma=" to declare a memory size
> that always movable.
> I think it might fulfill your requirement if extending the boot
> parameter with a start address.
> 
> more info at http://lwn.net/Articles/468044/
>>
>> And also, after a short investigation, CMA seems need to base on
>> memblock. But we need to limit memblock not to allocate memory on
>> ZONE_MOVABLE. As a result, we need to know the ranges before memblock
>> could be used. I'm afraid we still need an approach to get the ranges,
>> such as a boot option, or from static ACPI tables such as SRAT/MPST.
>>
> 
> Yes, it's based on memblock and with boot option.
> In setup_arch32()
>     dma_contiguous_reserve(0);   => will declare a cma area using
> memblock_reserve()
> 
>> I'm don't know much about CMA for now. So if you have any better idea,
>> please share with us, thanks. :)
> 
> My idea is reuse cma like below patch(even not compiled) and boot with
> "cma=size@...rt_address".
> I don't know whether it can work and whether suitable for your
> requirement, if not forgive me for this noises.
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c
> index 612afcc..564962a 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/dma-contiguous.c
> @@ -59,11 +59,18 @@ struct cma *dma_contiguous_default_area;
>   */
>  static const unsigned long size_bytes = CMA_SIZE_MBYTES * SZ_1M;
>  static long size_cmdline = -1;
> +static long cma_start_cmdline = -1;
> 
>  static int __init early_cma(char *p)
>  {
> +       char *oldp;
>         pr_debug("%s(%s)\n", __func__, p);
> +       oldp = p;
>         size_cmdline = memparse(p, &p);
> +
> +       if (*p == '@')
> +               cma_start_cmdline = memparse(p+1, &p);
> +       printk("cma start:0x%x, size: 0x%x\n", size_cmdline, cma_start_cmdline);
>         return 0;
>  }
>  early_param("cma", early_cma);
> @@ -127,8 +134,10 @@ void __init dma_contiguous_reserve(phys_addr_t limit)
>         if (selected_size) {
>                 pr_debug("%s: reserving %ld MiB for global area\n", __func__,
>                          selected_size / SZ_1M);
> -
> -               dma_declare_contiguous(NULL, selected_size, 0, limit);
> +               if (cma_size_cmdline != -1)
> +                       dma_declare_contiguous(NULL, selected_size,
> cma_start_cmdline, limit);
> +               else
> +                       dma_declare_contiguous(NULL, selected_size, 0, limit);
>         }
>  };
Seems a good idea to reserve memory by reusing CMA logic, though need more
investigation here. One of CMA goal is to ensure pages in CMA are really
movable, and this patchset tries to achieve the same goal at a first glance.

 


--
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/