linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] mm/page_alloc: Add alloc_contig

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: <e37c16f5-7068-5359-a539-bee58e705122@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 16 Oct 2019 18:48:37 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-mm@...ck.org, Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        Mel Gorman <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        Mike Rapoport <rppt@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pavel.tatashin@...rosoft.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] mm/page_alloc: Add alloc_contig_pages()

On 16.10.19 17:31, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> 
> 
> On 10/16/2019 06:11 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Wed 16-10-19 14:29:05, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 16.10.19 13:51, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>> On Wed 16-10-19 16:43:57, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10/16/2019 04:39 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>>> Just to make sure, you ignored my comment regarding alignment
>>>>>> although I explicitly mentioned it a second time? Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> I had asked Michal explicitly what to be included for the respin. Anyways
>>>>> seems like the previous thread is active again. I am happy to incorporate
>>>>> anything new getting agreed on there.
>>>>
>>>> Your patch is using the same alignment as the original code would do. If
>>>> an explicit alignement is needed then this can be added on top, right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Again, the "issue" I see here is that we could now pass in numbers that are
>>> not a power of two. For gigantic pages it was clear that we always have a
>>> number of two. The alignment does not make any sense otherwise.
> 
> ALIGN() does expect nr_pages two be power of two otherwise the mask
> value might not be correct, affecting start pfn value for a zone.
> 
> #define ALIGN(x, a)             	__ALIGN_KERNEL((x), (a))
> #define __ALIGN_KERNEL(x, a)            __ALIGN_KERNEL_MASK(x, (typeof(x))(a) - 1)
> #define __ALIGN_KERNEL_MASK(x, mask)    (((x) + (mask)) & ~(mask))
> 
>>>
>>> What I'm asking for is
>>>
>>> a) Document "The resulting PFN is aligned to nr_pages" and "nr_pages should
>>> be a power of two".
>>
>> OK, this makes sense.
> Sure, will add this to the alloc_contig_pages() helper description and
> in the commit message as well.

As long as it is documented that implicit alignment will happen, fine 
with me.

The thing about !is_power_of2() is that we usually don't need an 
alignment there (or instead an explicit one). And as I mentioned, the 
current function might fail easily to allocate a suitable range due to 
the way the search works (== check aligned blocks only). The search 
really only provides reliable results when size==alignment and it's a 
power of two IMHO. Not documenting that is in my opinion misleading - 
somebody who wants !is_power_of2() and has no alignment requirements 
should probably rework the function first.

So with some documentation regarding that

Acked-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>

-- 

Thanks,

David / dhildenb