[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrUDpzHV0mZXkg4QX9zspJKZ8vngA2_ybL6E+faiTJqpkw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 17:52:07 -0800
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Waiman Long <waiman.long@...com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/11] x86/mm/hotplug: Don't remove PGD entries in remove_pagetable()
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 1:56 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 11:04 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:23 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>> >> So when memory hotplug removes a piece of physical memory from pagetable
>> >> mappings, it also frees the underlying PGD entry.
>> >>
>> >> This complicates PGD management, so don't do this. We can keep the
>> >> PGD mapped and the PUD table all clear - it's only a single 4K page
>> >> per 512 GB of memory hotplugged.
>> >
>> > Ressurecting an ancient thread: I want this particular change to make
>> > it (much) easier to make vmapped stacks work correctly. Could it be
>> > applied by itself?
>> >
>>
>> It's incomplete. pageattr.c has another instance of the same thing.
>> I'll see if I can make it work, but I may end up doing something a
>> little different.
>
> If so then mind picking up (and fixing ;-) tip:WIP.x86/mm in its entirety? It's
> well tested so shouldn't have too many easy to hit bugs. Feel free to rebase and
> restructure it, it's a WIP tree.
I'll chew on this one patch a bit and see where the whole things go.
If I can rebase the rest on top, I'll use them.
BTW, how are current kernels possibly correct when this code runs? We
zap a pgd from the init pgd. I can't find any code that would try to
propagate that zapped pgd to other pgds. Then, if we hotplug in some
more memory or claim the slot for vmap, we'll install a new pgd entry,
and we might access *that* through a different pgd. There vmalloc
fault fixup won't help because the MMU will chase a stale pointer in
the old pgd.
So we might actually need this patch sooner rather than later.
>
> I keep getting distracted with other things but I'd hate if this got dropped on
> the floor.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ingo
--
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
Powered by blists - more mailing lists