linux-kernel - Re: dax alignment problem on arm64 (and other achitectures)

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: <CA+CK2bCD13JBLMxn2mAuRyVQGKBS5ic2UqYSsxXTccszXCmHkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 29 Jan 2021 14:41:47 -0500
From:   Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
To:     David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc:     Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
        linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
        Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Subject: Re: dax alignment problem on arm64 (and other achitectures)

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 2:12 PM Pavel Tatashin
<pasha.tatashin@...een.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 2:06 PM Pavel Tatashin
> <pasha.tatashin@...een.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Definitely, but we should try figuring out what's going on here. I
> > > > assume on x86-64 it behaves differently?
> > >
> > > Yes, we should root cause. I highly suspect that there is somewhere
> > > alignment miscalculations happen that cause this memory waste with the
> > > offset 16M. I am also not sure why the 2M label size was increased,
> > > and  why 16M is now an alignment requirement.
> >
> > This appears to be because even if we set vmemmap to be outside of the
> > dax device, the alignment calculates the maximum size of vmemmap for
> > this device, and subtracts it from the devdax size.
> > See [1], line 795 is where this offset is calculated.
> >
> > This also explains why with 64K pages, the 16M offset worked: because
> > fewer struct pages were able to fit within 16M - label size.
> >
> > [1] https://soleen.com/source/xref/linux/drivers/nvdimm/pfn_devs.c?r=b7b3c01b&mo=18459&fi=718#795
>
> Actually, strike the previous e-mail. The extra space is when we
> reserve vmemmap from devdax. IFF we do it from mem, the extra space is
> not added. Now, this alignment makes total sense.

commit 2522afb86a8cceba0f67dbf05772d21b76d79f06
Author: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Date:   Thu Jan 30 12:06:23 2020 -0800

    libnvdimm/region: Introduce an 'align' attribute


This is the patch that introduced the 16M alignment.

/*
 * PowerPC requires this alignment for memremap_pages(). All other archs
 * should be ok with SUBSECTION_SIZE (see memremap_compat_align()).
 */
#define MEMREMAP_COMPAT_ALIGN_MAX SZ_16M

static unsigned long default_align(struct nd_region *nd_region)
{
        unsigned long align;
        int i, mappings;
        u32 remainder;

        if (is_nd_blk(&nd_region->dev))
                align = PAGE_SIZE;
        else
                align = MEMREMAP_COMPAT_ALIGN_MAX;

Dan, is this logic correct? Why is_nd_pmem() cannot be set to
SUBSECTION_SIZE alignment?

Thank you,
Pasha

>
> Pasha