linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] cxl/mem: Register CXL memX devices

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: <20210212133304.00001f28@Huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Feb 2021 13:33:04 +0000
From:   Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
To:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
CC:     Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com>, <linux-cxl@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Linux ACPI" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        Chris Browy <cbrowy@...ry-design.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@...el.com>,
        Jon Masters <jcm@...masters.org>,
        "Rafael Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        "John Groves (jgroves)" <jgroves@...ron.com>,
        "Kelley, Sean V" <sean.v.kelley@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] cxl/mem: Register CXL memX devices

On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 12:40:45 -0800
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 2:19 AM Jonathan Cameron
> <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 18:17:25 +0000
> > Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com> wrote:
> >  
> > > On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 16:02:54 -0800
> > > Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com> wrote:
> > >  
> > > > From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> > > >
> > > > Create the /sys/bus/cxl hierarchy to enumerate:
> > > >
> > > > * Memory Devices (per-endpoint control devices)
> > > >
> > > > * Memory Address Space Devices (platform address ranges with
> > > >   interleaving, performance, and persistence attributes)
> > > >
> > > > * Memory Regions (active provisioned memory from an address space device
> > > >   that is in use as System RAM or delegated to libnvdimm as Persistent
> > > >   Memory regions).
> > > >
> > > > For now, only the per-endpoint control devices are registered on the
> > > > 'cxl' bus. However, going forward it will provide a mechanism to
> > > > coordinate cross-device interleave.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Ben Widawsky <ben.widawsky@...el.com>  
> > >
> > > One stray header, and a request for a tiny bit of reordering to
> > > make it easier to chase through creation and destruction.
> > >
> > > Either way with the header move to earlier patch I'm fine with this one.
> > >
> > > Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>  
> >
> > Actually thinking more on this, what is the justification for the
> > complexity + overhead of a percpu_refcount vs a refcount  
> 
> A typical refcount does not have the block and drain semantics of a
> percpu_ref. I'm planning to circle back and make this a first class
> facility of the cdev interface borrowing the debugfs approach [1], but
> for now percpu_ref fits the bill locally.
> 
> > I don't think this is a high enough performance path for it to matter.
> > Perhaps I'm missing a usecase where it does?  
> 
> It's less about percpu_ref performance and more about the
> percpu_ref_tryget_live() facility.
> 
> [1]: http://lore.kernel.org/r/CAPcyv4jEYPsyh0bhbtKGRbK3bgp=_+=2rjx4X0gLi5-25VvDyg@mail.gmail.com

Thanks for the reference. Definitely a nasty corner to clean up so I'll
keep an eye open for a new version of that series.

Jonathan