| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <71EE13C0-9CF7-4F1F-9C17-64500A854BD8@nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 06 May 2021 15:03:22 -0400
From: "Zi Yan" <ziy@...dia.com>
To: "David Hildenbrand" <david@...hat.com>
Cc: "Oscar Salvador" <osalvador@...e.de>,
"Michael Ellerman" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"Benjamin Herrenschmidt" <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>, x86@...nel.org,
"Andy Lutomirski" <luto@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Mike Rapoport" <rppt@...nel.org>,
"Anshuman Khandual" <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
"Michal Hocko" <mhocko@...e.com>,
"Dan Williams" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"Wei Yang" <richard.weiyang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] mm: sparse: set/clear subsection bitmap when
pages are onlined/offlined.
On 6 May 2021, at 13:48, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 06.05.21 17:26, Zi Yan wrote:
>> From: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
>>
>> subsection bitmap was set/cleared when a section is added/removed, but
>> pfn_to_online_page() uses subsection bitmap to check if the page is
>> online, which is not accurate. It was working when a whole section is
>> added/removed during memory hotplug and hotremove. When the following
>> patches enable memory hotplug and hotremove for subsections,
>> subsection bitmap needs to be changed during page online/offline time,
>> otherwise, pfn_to_online_page() will not give right answers. Move the
>> subsection bitmap manipulation code from section_activate() to
>> online_mem_sections() and section_deactivate() to
>> offline_mem_sections(), respectively.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>
>> ---
>> mm/sparse.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/mm/sparse.c b/mm/sparse.c
>> index b2ada9dc00cb..7637208b8874 100644
>> --- a/mm/sparse.c
>> +++ b/mm/sparse.c
>> @@ -606,6 +606,7 @@ void __init sparse_init(void)
>> #ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG
>> +static int fill_subsection_map(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages);
>> /* Mark all memory sections within the pfn range as online */
>> void online_mem_sections(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
>> {
>> @@ -621,9 +622,12 @@ void online_mem_sections(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
>> ms = __nr_to_section(section_nr);
>> ms->section_mem_map |= SECTION_IS_ONLINE;
>> + fill_subsection_map(pfn, min(end_pfn, pfn + PAGES_PER_SECTION) - pfn);
>> }
>> }
>> +static int clear_subsection_map(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages);
>> +static bool is_subsection_map_empty(struct mem_section *ms);
>> /* Mark all memory sections within the pfn range as offline */
>> void offline_mem_sections(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
>> {
>> @@ -641,7 +645,13 @@ void offline_mem_sections(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long end_pfn)
>> continue;
>> ms = __nr_to_section(section_nr);
>> - ms->section_mem_map &= ~SECTION_IS_ONLINE;
>> +
>> + if (end_pfn < pfn + PAGES_PER_SECTION) {
>> + clear_subsection_map(pfn, end_pfn - pfn);
>> + if (is_subsection_map_empty(ms))
>> + ms->section_mem_map &= ~SECTION_IS_ONLINE;
>> + } else
>> + ms->section_mem_map &= ~SECTION_IS_ONLINE;
>> }
>> }
>> @@ -668,6 +678,17 @@ static void free_map_bootmem(struct page *memmap)
>> vmemmap_free(start, end, NULL);
>> }
>> +static int subsection_map_intersects(struct mem_section *ms, unsigned long pfn,
>> + unsigned long nr_pages)
>> +{
>> + DECLARE_BITMAP(map, SUBSECTIONS_PER_SECTION) = { 0 };
>> + unsigned long *subsection_map = &ms->usage->subsection_map[0];
>> +
>> + subsection_mask_set(map, pfn, nr_pages);
>> +
>> + return bitmap_intersects(map, subsection_map, SUBSECTIONS_PER_SECTION);
>> +}
>> +
>> static int clear_subsection_map(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages)
>> {
>> DECLARE_BITMAP(map, SUBSECTIONS_PER_SECTION) = { 0 };
>> @@ -760,6 +781,12 @@ static void free_map_bootmem(struct page *memmap)
>> }
>> }
>> +static int subsection_map_intersects(struct mem_section *ms, unsigned long pfn,
>> + unsigned long nr_pages)
>> +{
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> static int clear_subsection_map(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages)
>> {
>> return 0;
>> @@ -800,7 +827,10 @@ static void section_deactivate(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages,
>> struct page *memmap = NULL;
>> bool empty;
>> - if (clear_subsection_map(pfn, nr_pages))
>> + if (WARN((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPARSEMEM_VMEMMAP) && !ms->usage) ||
>> + subsection_map_intersects(ms, pfn, nr_pages),
>> + "section already deactivated (%#lx + %ld)\n",
>> + pfn, nr_pages))
>> return;
>> empty = is_subsection_map_empty(ms);
>> @@ -855,7 +885,7 @@ static struct page * __meminit section_activate(int nid, unsigned long pfn,
>> ms->usage = usage;
>> }
>> - rc = fill_subsection_map(pfn, nr_pages);
>> + rc = !nr_pages || subsection_map_intersects(ms, pfn, nr_pages);
>> if (rc) {
>> if (usage)
>> ms->usage = NULL;
>>
>
> If I am not missing something, this is completely broken for devmem/ZONE_DEVICE that never onlines pages. But also when memory blocks are never onlined, this would be just wrong. Least thing you would need is a sub-section online map.
Thanks for pointing this out. I did not know that devmem/ZONE_DEVICE never onlines pages.
>
> But glimpsing at patch #2, I'd rather stop right away digging deeper into this series :)
What is the issue of patch 2, which makes pageblock_order a variable all the time? BTW, patch 2 fixes a bug by exporting pageblock_order, since when HUGETLB_PAGE_SIZE_VARIABLE is set, virtio-mem will not see pageblock_order as a variable, which could happen for PPC_BOOK2S_64 with virtio-men enabled, right? Or is this an invalid combination?
>
> I think what would really help is drafting a design of how it all could look like and then first discussing the high-level design, investigating how it could play along with all existing users, existing workloads, and existing use cases. Proposing such changes without a clear picture in mind and a high-level overview might give you some unpleasant reactions from some of the developers around here ;)
Please see my other email for a high-level design. Also I sent the patchset as a RFC to gather information on users, workloads, use cases I did not know about and I learnt a lot from your replies. :) Feedback is always welcome, but I am not sure why it needs to make people unpleasant. ;)
—
Best Regards,
Yan Zi
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (855 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists