[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2021 14:20:36 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
x86@...nel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86/vmemmap: Remove !PAGE_ALIGNED case in
remove_pte_table
> @@ -962,7 +962,6 @@ remove_pte_table(pte_t *pte_start, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
> {
> unsigned long next, pages = 0;
> pte_t *pte;
> - void *page_addr;
> phys_addr_t phys_addr;
>
> pte = pte_start + pte_index(addr);
> @@ -983,42 +982,19 @@ remove_pte_table(pte_t *pte_start, unsigned long addr, unsigned long end,
> if (phys_addr < (phys_addr_t)0x40000000)
> return;
>
> - if (PAGE_ALIGNED(addr) && PAGE_ALIGNED(next)) {
> - /*
> - * Do not free direct mapping pages since they were
> - * freed when offlining, or simplely not in use.
> - */
> - if (!direct)
> - free_pagetable(pte_page(*pte), 0);
> -
> - spin_lock(&init_mm.page_table_lock);
> - pte_clear(&init_mm, addr, pte);
> - spin_unlock(&init_mm.page_table_lock);
> -
> - /* For non-direct mapping, pages means nothing. */
> - pages++;
> - } else {
> - /*
> - * If we are here, we are freeing vmemmap pages since
> - * direct mapped memory ranges to be freed are aligned.
> - *
> - * If we are not removing the whole page, it means
> - * other page structs in this page are being used and
> - * we canot remove them. So fill the unused page_structs
> - * with 0xFD, and remove the page when it is wholly
> - * filled with 0xFD.
> - */
> - memset((void *)addr, PAGE_INUSE, next - addr);
> + /*
> + * Do not free direct mapping pages since they were
> + * freed when offlining, or simplely not in use.
> + */
s/simplely/simply/ (I know, not your fault :) )
However, that comment is highly confusing. There is nothing to free in
case of the a direct mapping; we never allocated anything. That's how a
direct map works.
I'd just get rid of the comment completely - we also don't have one at
the other "if (!direct)" places.
(side note: all this freeing before unmapping looks very weird, but at
least we should have valid accesses anymore)
> + if (!direct)
> + free_pagetable(pte_page(*pte), 0);
[...]
> {
> + /*
> + * See comment in vmemmap_populate().
> + */
I'd drop this comment ...
> + VM_BUG_ON(!IS_ALIGNED(start, PAGE_SIZE));
> + VM_BUG_ON(!IS_ALIGNED(end, PAGE_SIZE));
> +
> remove_pagetable(start, end, false, altmap);
> }
>
> @@ -1556,6 +1538,15 @@ int __meminit vmemmap_populate(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, int node,
> {
> int err;
>
> + /*
> + * __populate_section_memmap enforces the range to be added to be
> + * PMD aligned. Therefore we can be sure that, as long as the
> + * struct page size is multiple of 8, the vmemmap range will be
> + * PAGE aligned.
> + */
... and this comment, moving the details into the patch description.
The commit should be easy to detect using git blame in case anybody
wonders why.
> + VM_BUG_ON(!IS_ALIGNED(start, PAGE_SIZE));
> + VM_BUG_ON(!IS_ALIGNED(end, PAGE_SIZE));
> +
> if (end - start < PAGES_PER_SECTION * sizeof(struct page))
> err = vmemmap_populate_basepages(start, end, node, NULL);
> else if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PSE))
>
Apart from that looks good, thanks!
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
Powered by blists - more mailing lists