linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] RISC-V: Implement sparsemem

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAEbi=3cn4+7zk2DU1iRa45CDwTsJYfkAV8jXHf-S7Jz63eYy-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 1 Aug 2019 11:34:37 +0800
From:   Greentime Hu <green.hu@...il.com>
To:     Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
Cc:     greentime.hu@...ive.com, paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        Andrew Waterman <andrew@...ive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...ive.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Stephen Bates <sbates@...thlin.com>,
        Zong Li <zong@...estech.com>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
        Michael Clark <michaeljclark@....com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] RISC-V: Implement sparsemem

Hi Logan,

Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com> 於 2019年8月1日 週四 上午1:08寫道：
>
>
>
> On 2019-07-31 12:30 a.m., Greentime Hu wrote:
> > I look this issue more closely.
> > I found it always sets each memblock region to node 0. Does this make sense?
> > I am not sure if I understand this correctly. Do you have any idea for
> > this? Thank you. :)
>
> Yes, I think this is normal. When we talk about memory nodes we're
> talking about NUMA nodes which is unrelated to device tree nodes.

Ok, but it seems the second memblock_region may overwrite the first
memblock_region in for_each_memblock(memory, reg)  loop. It always
uses this API to set to node 0.
memblock_set_node(PFN_PHYS(start_pfn),PFN_PHYS(end_pfn - start_pfn),
&memblock.memory,0)


> I'm not really sure what's causing the crash. Have you verified it's
> this patch that causes it? Is it related to there being a hole in your
> memory, does it work if you only have one memory node?
>

It works fine if there is only one memory node described in dts.

I think it is related to there being a hole in the device tree script.
I don't actually have a platform with a hole in the memory region, so
I use device tree script to describe it.

The physical address layout will be like this.
2GB-3GB-hole-6GB-7GB

memory@...00000 {
    device_type = "memory";
    reg = <0x0 0x80000000 0x0 0x40000000>;
};
memory@...000000 {
    device_type = "memory";
    reg = <0x1 0x80000000 0x0 0x40000000>;
};

Thank you for the quick reply. :)