linux-kernel - Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v3 05/21] mm/hugetlb: Introduce pgtable allocation/freeing helpers

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: <CAMZfGtUXus9gRsCbtV-+HmvWNY==oQxP+L3bzwmpTCZZ725Ynw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 Nov 2020 12:18:07 +0800
From:   Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
To:     Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, mingo@...hat.com,
        bp@...en8.de, x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com,
        dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, luto@...nel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, paulmck@...nel.org,
        mchehab+huawei@...nel.org, pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>, oneukum@...e.com,
        anshuman.khandual@....com, jroedel@...e.de,
        Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Matthew Wilcox <willy@...radead.org>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Xiongchun duan <duanxiongchun@...edance.com>,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v3 05/21] mm/hugetlb: Introduce pgtable
 allocation/freeing helpers

On Fri, Nov 13, 2020 at 8:38 AM Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/10/20 7:41 PM, Muchun Song wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 8:47 AM Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 11/8/20 6:10 AM, Muchun Song wrote:
> >> I am reading the code incorrectly it does not appear page->lru (of the huge
> >> page) is being used for this purpose.  Is that correct?
> >>
> >> If it is correct, would using page->lru of the huge page make this code
> >> simpler?  I am just missing the reason why you are using
> >> page_huge_pte(page)->lru
> >
> > For 1GB HugeTLB pages, we should pre-allocate more than one page
> > table. So I use a linked list. The page_huge_pte(page) is the list head.
> > Because the page->lru shares storage with page->pmd_huge_pte.
>
> Sorry, but I do not understand the statement page->lru shares storage with
> page->pmd_huge_pte.  Are you saying they are both in head struct page of
> the huge page?
>
> Here is what I was suggesting.  If we just use page->lru for the list
> then vmemmap_pgtable_prealloc() could be coded like the following:
>
> static int vmemmap_pgtable_prealloc(struct hstate *h, struct page *page)
> {
>         struct page *pte_page, *t_page;
>         unsigned int nr = pgtable_pages_to_prealloc_per_hpage(h);
>
>         if (!nr)
>                 return 0;
>
>         /* Store preallocated pages on huge page lru list */
>         INIT_LIST_HEAD(&page->lru);
>
>         while (nr--) {
>                 pte_t *pte_p;
>
>                 pte_p = pte_alloc_one_kernel(&init_mm);
>                 if (!pte_p)
>                         goto out;
>                 list_add(&virt_to_page(pte_p)->lru, &page->lru);
>         }
>
>         return 0;
> out:
>         list_for_each_entry_safe(pte_page, t_page, &page->lru, lru)
>                 pte_free_kernel(&init_mm, page_to_virt(pte_page));
>         return -ENOMEM;
> }
>
> By doing this we could eliminate the routines,
> vmemmap_pgtable_init()
> vmemmap_pgtable_deposit()
> vmemmap_pgtable_withdraw()
> and simply use the list manipulation routines.

Now I know what you mean. Yeah, just use page->lru can make code
simply. Thanks for your suggestions.

>
> To me, that looks simpler than the proposed code in this patch.
> --
> Mike Kravetz



-- 
Yours,
Muchun