[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130115152254.GC2682@phenom.dumpdata.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:22:54 -0500
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@....de>,
Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7u1 10/31] x86, 64bit: Don't set max_pfn_mapped wrong
value early on native path
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 01:48:45PM +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Jan 2013, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> > We are not having max_pfn_mapped set correctly until init_memory_mapping.
> >
> > so don't print it initial value for 64bit
> >
> > Also need to use KERNEL_IMAGE_SIZE directly for highmap cleanup.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kernel/head64.c | 3 ---
> > arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 2 ++
> > arch/x86/mm/init_64.c | 6 +++++-
> > 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c b/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c
> > index a3fc233..7061d8b 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/head64.c
> > @@ -146,9 +146,6 @@ void __init x86_64_start_kernel(char * real_mode_data)
> > /* clear bss before set_intr_gate with early_idt_handler */
> > clear_bss();
> >
> > - /* XXX - this is wrong... we need to build page tables from scratch */
> > - max_pfn_mapped = KERNEL_IMAGE_SIZE >> PAGE_SHIFT;
> > -
> > for (i = 0; i < NUM_EXCEPTION_VECTORS; i++) {
> > #ifdef CONFIG_EARLY_PRINTK
> > set_intr_gate(i, &early_idt_handlers[i]);
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > index 63160c6..04797e78 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > @@ -910,8 +910,10 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> > setup_bios_corruption_check();
> > #endif
> >
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> > printk(KERN_DEBUG "initial memory mapped: [mem 0x00000000-%#010lx]\n",
> > (max_pfn_mapped<<PAGE_SHIFT) - 1);
> > +#endif
> >
> > reserve_real_mode();
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> > index 9c5f2b1..98385a2 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/init_64.c
> > @@ -394,10 +394,14 @@ void __init init_extra_mapping_uc(unsigned long phys, unsigned long size)
> > void __init cleanup_highmap(void)
> > {
> > unsigned long vaddr = __START_KERNEL_map;
> > - unsigned long vaddr_end = __START_KERNEL_map + (max_pfn_mapped << PAGE_SHIFT);
> > + unsigned long vaddr_end = __START_KERNEL_map + KERNEL_IMAGE_SIZE;
> > unsigned long end = roundup((unsigned long)_brk_end, PMD_SIZE) - 1;
> > pmd_t *pmd = level2_kernel_pgt;
> >
> > + /* Xen has its own end somehow with abused max_pfn_mapped */
> > + if (max_pfn_mapped)
> > + vaddr_end = __START_KERNEL_map + (max_pfn_mapped << PAGE_SHIFT);
>
> If you are going to put a comment like that in the code, could you
> please at least add some useful details, rather than a generic
> "somehow"? It doesn't seem very helpful to me or to any other hackers
> looking at the code.
Hm I think I actually pointed out to him in the previous reviews how
we alter it and that he should ingest some of those comments in this
patch.
>
> The issue is even described as a comment in the code at the beginning of
> arch/x86/xen/mmu.c:xen_setup_kernel_pagetable:
>
> /* max_pfn_mapped is the last pfn mapped in the initial memory
> * mappings. Considering that on Xen after the kernel mappings we
> * have the mappings of some pages that don't exist in pfn space, we
> * set max_pfn_mapped to the last real pfn mapped. */
>
> Now if max_pfn_mapped is supposed to represent the last pfn mapped in
> the initial memory mapping, then I think that the way Xen uses
> max_pfn_mapped is actually correct.
>
>
> The question is: has max_pfn_mapped actually changed meaning?
> Because if it hasn't I don't see why you need this change.
>
>
>
> > for (; vaddr + PMD_SIZE - 1 < vaddr_end; pmd++, vaddr += PMD_SIZE) {
> > if (pmd_none(*pmd))
> > continue;
> > --
> > 1.7.10.4
> >
> > --
> > 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/
> >
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists