linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] libnvdimm, pmem: adjust for section collisions with 'System RAM'

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <1457146138.15454.277.camel@hpe.com>
Date:	Fri, 04 Mar 2016 19:48:58 -0700
From:	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>
To:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org
Cc:	linux-mm@...ck.org, Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] libnvdimm, pmem: adjust for section collisions
 with 'System RAM'

On Thu, 2016-03-03 at 13:53 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> On a platform where 'Persistent Memory' and 'System RAM' are mixed
> within a given sparsemem section, trim the namespace and notify about the
> sub-optimal alignment.
> 
> Cc: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>
> Cc: Ross Zwisler <ross.zwisler@...ux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> ---
>  drivers/nvdimm/namespace_devs.c |    7 ++
>  drivers/nvdimm/pfn.h            |   10 ++-
>  drivers/nvdimm/pfn_devs.c       |    5 ++
>  drivers/nvdimm/pmem.c           |  125 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> ------
>  4 files changed, 111 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/nvdimm/namespace_devs.c
> b/drivers/nvdimm/namespace_devs.c
> index 8ebfcaae3f5a..463756ca2d4b 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvdimm/namespace_devs.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvdimm/namespace_devs.c
> @@ -133,6 +133,7 @@ bool nd_is_uuid_unique(struct device *dev, u8 *uuid)
>  bool pmem_should_map_pages(struct device *dev)
>  {
>  	struct nd_region *nd_region = to_nd_region(dev->parent);
> +	struct nd_namespace_io *nsio;
>  
>  	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ZONE_DEVICE))
>  		return false;
> @@ -143,6 +144,12 @@ bool pmem_should_map_pages(struct device *dev)
>  	if (is_nd_pfn(dev) || is_nd_btt(dev))
>  		return false;
>  
> +	nsio = to_nd_namespace_io(dev);
> +	if (region_intersects(nsio->res.start, resource_size(&nsio-
> >res),
> +				IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> +				IORES_DESC_NONE) == REGION_MIXED)

Should this be != REGION_DISJOINT for safe?

> +		return false;
> +

 :

> @@ -304,21 +311,56 @@ static int nd_pfn_init(struct nd_pfn *nd_pfn)
>  	}
>  
>  	memset(pfn_sb, 0, sizeof(*pfn_sb));
> -	npfns = (pmem->size - SZ_8K) / SZ_4K;
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Check if pmem collides with 'System RAM' when section aligned
> and
> +	 * trim it accordingly
> +	 */
> +	nsio = to_nd_namespace_io(&ndns->dev);
> +	start = PHYS_SECTION_ALIGN_DOWN(nsio->res.start);
> +	size = resource_size(&nsio->res);
> +	if (region_intersects(start, size, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> +				IORES_DESC_NONE) == REGION_MIXED) {
> +
> +		start = nsio->res.start;
> +		start_pad = PHYS_SECTION_ALIGN_UP(start) - start;
> +	}
> +
> +	start = nsio->res.start;
> +	size = PHYS_SECTION_ALIGN_UP(start + size) - start;
> +	if (region_intersects(start, size, IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM,
> +				IORES_DESC_NONE) == REGION_MIXED) {
> +		size = resource_size(&nsio->res);
> +		end_trunc = start + size - PHYS_SECTION_ALIGN_DOWN(start
> + size);
> +	}

This check seems to assume that guest's regular memory layout does not
change.  That is, if there is no collision at first, there won't be any
later.  Is this a valid assumption?

Thanks,
-Toshi