linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE

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:	Fri, 21 Aug 2015 08:02:51 -0700
From:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc:	Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@...il.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Boaz Harrosh <boaz@...xistor.com>,
	Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
	"linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org" <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
	david <david@...morbit.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
	"torvalds@...ux-foundation.org" <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory"

[ Adding David Woodhouse ]

On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 1:59 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 02:52:15PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
>> The idea is that this memory is not meant to be available to the page
>> allocator and should not count as new memory capacity.  We're only
>> hotplugging it to get struct page coverage.
>
> This might need a bigger audit of the max_pfn usages.  I remember
> architectures using it as a decisions for using IOMMUs or similar.

We chatted about this at LPC yesterday.  The takeaway was that the
max_pfn checks that the IOMMU code does is for checking whether a
device needs an io-virtual mapping to reach addresses above its DMA
limit (if it can't do 64-bit DMA).  Given the capacities of persistent
memory it's likely that a device with this limitation already can't
address all of RAM let alone PMEM.   So it seems to me that updating
max_pfn for PMEM hotplug does not buy us anything except a few more
opportunities to confuse PMEM as typical RAM.
--
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/