linux-kernel - Re: [HMM 14/16] mm/hmm/devmem: device memory hotplug using 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]

Message-ID: <1491798699.26188.1.camel@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Apr 2017 14:31:39 +1000
From:   Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>
To:     Jerome Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
        David Nellans <dnellans@...dia.com>,
        Evgeny Baskakov <ebaskakov@...dia.com>,
        Mark Hairgrove <mhairgrove@...dia.com>,
        Sherry Cheung <SCheung@...dia.com>,
        Subhash Gutti <sgutti@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [HMM 14/16] mm/hmm/devmem: device memory hotplug using
 ZONE_DEVICE

On Fri, 2017-04-07 at 12:26 -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 10:02:55PM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 07, 2017 at 11:37:34AM +1000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2017-04-05 at 16:40 -0400, Jérôme Glisse wrote:
> > > > This introduce a simple struct and associated helpers for device driver
> > > > to use when hotpluging un-addressable device memory as ZONE_DEVICE. It
> > > > will find a unuse physical address range and trigger memory hotplug for
> > > > it which allocates and initialize struct page for the device memory.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Evgeny Baskakov <ebaskakov@...dia.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Mark Hairgrove <mhairgrove@...dia.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sherry Cheung <SCheung@...dia.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Subhash Gutti <sgutti@...dia.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  include/linux/hmm.h | 114 +++++++++++++++
> > > >  mm/Kconfig          |   9 ++
> > > >  mm/hmm.c            | 398 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  3 files changed, 521 insertions(+)
> > > > 
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * To add (hotplug) device memory, HMM assumes that there is no real resource
> > > > + * that reserves a range in the physical address space (this is intended to be
> > > > + * use by unaddressable device memory). It will reserve a physical range big
> > > > + * enough and allocate struct page for it.
> > > 
> > > I've found that the implementation of this is quite non-portable, in that
> > > starting from iomem_resource.end+1-size (which is effectively -size) on
> > > my platform (powerpc) does not give expected results. It could be that
> > > additional changes are needed to arch_add_memory() to support this
> > > use case.
> > 
> > The CDM version does not use that part, that being said isn't -size a valid
> > value we care only about unsigned here ? What is the end value on powerpc ?
> > In any case this sounds more like a unsigned/signed arithmetic issue, i will
> > look into it.
> > 

Thanks!

> > > 
> > > > +
> > > > +	size = ALIGN(size, SECTION_SIZE);
> > > > +	addr = (iomem_resource.end + 1ULL) - size;
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Why don't we allocate_resource() with the right constraints and get a new
> > > unused region?
> > 
> > The issue with allocate_resource() is that it does scan the resource tree
> > from lower address to higher ones. I was told that it was less likely to
> > have hotplug issue conflict if i pick highest physicall address for the
> > device memory hence why i do my own scan from the end toward the start.
> > 
> > Again all this function does not apply to PPC, it can be hidden behind
> > x86 config if you prefer it.
> 
> Ok so i have look into it and there is no arithmetic bug in my code the
> issue is simpler than that. It seems only x86 clamp iomem_resource.end to
> MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS so using allocate_resource() would just hide the issue.

> 
> It is fine not to clamp if you know that you won't get resource with
> funky physical address but in case of UNADDRESSABLE i do not get any
> physical address so i have to pick one and i want to pick one that is
> unlikely to cause trouble latter on with someone hotpluging memory.
> 
> If we care about the UNADDRESSABLE case on powerpc i see 2 way to fix
> this. Clamp iomem_resource.end to MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS or restrict my scan
> in hmm to MIN(iomem_resource.end, 1UL << MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS) the latter
> is probably safer and more bullet proof in respect to other arch getting
> interested in this.
>

We do care about UNADDRESSABLE for certain platforms on powerpc
 
I think MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS sounds good or we can make it an arch hook. I spoke
to Michael Ellerman and he recommended we do either. We can't clamp down
iomem_resource.end in the arch as we have other things beyond MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS,
but doing the walk in HMM from the end of MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS is a good idea to
begin with.

Balbir Singh.