linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 1/4] ACPI: Support Generic Initiator only domains

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Wed, 13 Nov 2019 21:57:24 +0800
From:   Tao Xu <tao3.xu@...el.com>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <jonathan.cameron@...wei.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:     Linux MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>,
        Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@...hat.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linuxarm <linuxarm@...wei.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 1/4] ACPI: Support Generic Initiator only domains

On 11/13/2019 5:47 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 09:55:17 -0800
> Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:
> 
>> [ add Tao Xu ]
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 4:45 AM Jonathan Cameron
>> <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Generic Initiators are a new ACPI concept that allows for the
>>> description of proximity domains that contain a device which
>>> performs memory access (such as a network card) but neither
>>> host CPU nor Memory.
>>>
>>> This patch has the parsing code and provides the infrastructure
>>> for an architecture to associate these new domains with their
>>> nearest memory processing node.
>>
>> Thanks for this Jonathan. May I ask how this was tested? Tao has been
>> working on qemu support for HMAT [1]. I have not checked if it already
>> supports generic initiator entries, but it would be helpful to include
>> an example of how the kernel sees these configurations in practice.
>>
>> [1]: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1096737/
> 
> Tested against qemu with SRAT and SLIT table overrides from an
> initrd to actually create the node and give it distances
> (those all turn up correctly in the normal places).  DSDT override
> used to move an emulated network card into the GI numa node.  That
> currently requires the PCI patch referred to in the cover letter.
> On arm64 tested both on qemu and real hardware (overrides on tables
> even for real hardware as I can't persuade our BIOS team to implement
> Generic Initiators until an OS is actually using them.)
> 
> Main real requirement is memory allocations then occur from one of
> the nodes at the minimal distance when you are do a devm_ allocation
> from a device assigned. Also need to be able to query the distances
> to allow load balancing etc.  All that works as expected.
> 
> It only has a fairly tangential connection to HMAT in that HMAT
> can provide information on GI nodes.  Given HMAT code is quite happy
> with memoryless nodes anyway it should work.  QEMU doesn't currently
> have support to create GI SRAT entries let alone HMAT using them.
> 
> Whilst I could look at adding such support to QEMU, it's not
> exactly high priority to emulate something we can test easily
> by overriding the tables before the kernel reads them.
> 
> I'll look at how hard it is to build an HMAT tables for my test
> configs based on the ones I used to test your HMAT patches a while
> back.  Should be easy if tedious.
> 
> Jonathan
> 
Indeed, HMAT can support Generic Initiator, but as far as I know, QEMU 
only can emulate a node with cpu and memory, or memory-only. Even if we 
assign a node with cpu only, qemu will raise error. Considering 
compatibility, there are lots of work to do for QEMU if we change NUMA 
or SRAT table.