linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mm: Use aligned zone start for pfn_to

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <50C0F944.5040208@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Thu, 06 Dec 2012 12:00:04 -0800
From:	Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
CC:	linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: Use aligned zone start for pfn_to_bitidx calculation

On 12/6/2012 2:12 AM, Mel Gorman wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2012 at 02:10:01PM -0800, Laura Abbott wrote:
>> The current calculation in pfn_to_bitidx assumes that
>> (pfn - zone->zone_start_pfn) >> pageblock_order will return the
>> same bit for all pfn in a pageblock. If zone_start_pfn is not
>> aligned to pageblock_nr_pages, this may not always be correct.
>>
>> Consider the following with pageblock order = 10, zone start 2MB:
>>
>> pfn     | pfn - zone start | (pfn - zone start) >> page block order
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> 0x26000 | 0x25e00	   |  0x97
>> 0x26100 | 0x25f00	   |  0x97
>> 0x26200 | 0x26000	   |  0x98
>> 0x26300 | 0x26100	   |  0x98
>>
>> This means that calling {get,set}_pageblock_migratetype on a single
>> page will not set the migratetype for the full block. The correct
>> fix is to round down zone_start_pfn for the bit index calculation.
>> Rather than do this calculation everytime, store this precalcualted
>> algined start in the zone structure to allow the actual start_pfn to
>> be used elsewhere.
>>
>> Change-Id: I13e2f53f50db294f38ec86138c17c6fe29f0ee82
>> Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott <lauraa@...eaurora.org>
>
> Hi Laura,
>
> There should be no need to add a new zone field. It's probably ok in terms
> of functionality but it does mean that we have to worry about things like
> hotplug (FWIW, should be fine) and the memory overhead is added even on
> CONFIG_SPARSEMEM where it is not needed. Instead, mask out the lower bits
> in pfn_to_bitidx() using the same round_down trick you already do. The
> cost is negligible.
>
> Thanks.
>

I was debating if storing the size was actually necessary. I'll resubmit 
with the calculation done directly in the function.

Thanks,
Laura

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
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/