linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/5] dax: "Hotplug" persistent memory for use like normal 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Wed, 13 Feb 2019 09:43:20 +0100
From:   Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@...ia.fr>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:     Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@....com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>,
        Ross Zwisler <zwisler@...nel.org>,
        Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@...el.com>,
        Yaowei Bai <baiyaowei@...s.chinamobile.com>,
        "Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] dax: "Hotplug" persistent memory for use like normal
 RAM


Le 13/02/2019 à 09:24, Dan Williams a écrit :
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 12:12 AM Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@...ia.fr> wrote:
>> Le 13/02/2019 à 01:30, Dan Williams a écrit :
>>> On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 11:59 AM Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@...ia.fr> wrote:
>>>> # ndctl disable-region all
>>>> # ndctl zero-labels all
>>>> # ndctl enable-region region0
>>>> # ndctl create-namespace -r region0 -t pmem -m devdax
>>>> {
>>>>   "dev":"namespace0.0",
>>>>   "mode":"devdax",
>>>>   "map":"dev",
>>>>   "size":"1488.37 GiB (1598.13 GB)",
>>>>   "uuid":"ad0096d7-3fe7-4402-b529-ad64ed0bf789",
>>>>   "daxregion":{
>>>>     "id":0,
>>>>     "size":"1488.37 GiB (1598.13 GB)",
>>>>     "align":2097152,
>>>>     "devices":[
>>>>       {
>>>>         "chardev":"dax0.0",
>>>>         "size":"1488.37 GiB (1598.13 GB)"
>>>>       }
>>>>     ]
>>>>   },
>>>>   "align":2097152
>>>> }
>>>> # ndctl enable-namespace namespace0.0
>>>> # echo -n dax0.0 > /sys/bus/dax/drivers/device_dax/remove_id
>>>> <hang>
>>>>
>>>> I tried with and without dax_pmem_compat loaded, but it doesn't help.
>>> I think this is due to:
>>>
>>>   a9f1ffdb6a20 device-dax: Auto-bind device after successful new_id
>>>
>>> I missed that this path is also called in the remove_id path. Thanks
>>> for the bug report! I'll get this fixed up.
>>
>> Now that remove_id is fixed, things fails later in Dave's procedure:
>>
>> # echo -n dax0.0 > /sys/bus/dax/drivers/device_dax/remove_id
>> # echo -n dax0.0 > /sys/bus/dax/drivers/device_dax/unbind
>> # echo -n dax0.0 > /sys/bus/dax/drivers/kmem/new_id
> In the current version of the code the bind is not necessary, so the
> lack of error messages here means the bind succeeded.
>
>> # echo -n dax0.0 > /sys/bus/dax/drivers/kmem/bind
>> -bash: echo: write error: No such device
> This also happens when the device is already bound.
>
>> (And nothing seems to have changed in /sys/devices/system/memory/*/state)
> What does "cat /proc/iomem" say?


3060000000-1aa5fffffff : Persistent Memory
  3060000000-36481fffff : namespace0.0
  3680000000-1a9ffffffff : dax0.0
    3680000000-1a9ffffffff : System RAM
(the last line wasn't here before attaching to kmem)

I said nothing changed in memory/*/state, I actually meant that nothing
was offline. But things are actually working!

First, node4 appeared, all memory is already attached to it without
having to write to memory/*/state

Node 4 MemTotal:       1558183936 kB
Node 4 MemFree:        1558068564 kB
Node 4 MemUsed:          115372 kB

I wasn't expecting node4 to appear because the machine has no
/sys/firmware/acpi/tables/HMAT when running in 1LM (there's one in 2LM).
I thought you said in the past that no HMAT would mean memory would be
added to the existing DDR node?

Thanks!

Brice