| 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: <YQFeJ1P9wQvlqAz7@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 15:39:51 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
Marek Kedzierski <mkedzier@...hat.com>,
Hui Zhu <teawater@...il.com>,
Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta.linux@...il.com>,
Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] drivers/base/memory: introduce "memory groups" to
logically group memory blocks
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 02:52:04PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> In our "auto-movable" memory onlining policy, we want to make decisions
> across memory blocks of a single memory device. Examples of memory devices
> include ACPI memory devices (in the simplest case a single DIMM) and
> virtio-mem. For now, we don't have a connection between a single memory
> block device and the real memory device. Each memory device consists of
> 1..X memory block devices.
>
> Let's logically group memory blocks belonging to the same memory device
> in "memory groups". Memory groups can span multiple physical ranges and a
> memory group itself does not contain any information regarding physical
> ranges, only properties (e.g., "max_pages") necessary for improved memory
> onlining.
>
> Introduce two memory group types:
>
> 1) Static memory group: E.g., a single ACPI memory device, consisting of
> 1..X memory resources. A memory group consists of 1..Y memory blocks.
> The whole group is added/removed in one go. If any part cannot get
> offlined, the whole group cannot be removed.
>
> 2) Dynamic memory group: E.g., a single virtio-mem device. Memory is
> dynamically added/removed in a fixed granularity, called a "unit",
> consisting of 1..X memory blocks. A unit is added/removed in one go.
> If any part of a unit cannot get offlined, the whole unit cannot be
> removed.
>
> In case of 1) we usually want either all memory managed by ZONE_MOVABLE
> or none. In case of 2) we usually want to have as many units as possible
> managed by ZONE_MOVABLE. We want a single unit to be of the same type.
>
> For now, memory groups are an internal concept that is not exposed to
> user space; we might want to change that in the future, though.
>
> add_memory() users can specify a mgid instead of a nid when passing
> the MHP_NID_IS_MGID flag.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/base/memory.c | 102 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> include/linux/memory.h | 46 ++++++++++++++-
> include/linux/memory_hotplug.h | 6 +-
> mm/memory_hotplug.c | 11 +++-
> 4 files changed, 158 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/memory.c b/drivers/base/memory.c
> index 86ec2dc82fc2..42109e7fb0b5 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/memory.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/memory.c
> @@ -82,6 +82,11 @@ static struct bus_type memory_subsys = {
> */
> static DEFINE_XARRAY(memory_blocks);
>
> +/*
> + * Memory groups, indexed by memory group identification (mgid).
> + */
> +static DEFINE_XARRAY_FLAGS(memory_groups, XA_FLAGS_ALLOC);
> +
> static BLOCKING_NOTIFIER_HEAD(memory_chain);
>
> int register_memory_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb)
> @@ -634,7 +639,8 @@ int register_memory(struct memory_block *memory)
> }
>
> static int init_memory_block(unsigned long block_id, unsigned long state,
> - unsigned long nr_vmemmap_pages)
> + unsigned long nr_vmemmap_pages,
> + struct memory_group *group)
> {
> struct memory_block *mem;
> int ret = 0;
> @@ -653,6 +659,11 @@ static int init_memory_block(unsigned long block_id, unsigned long state,
> mem->nid = NUMA_NO_NODE;
> mem->nr_vmemmap_pages = nr_vmemmap_pages;
>
> + if (group) {
> + mem->group = group;
> + refcount_inc(&group->refcount);
> + }
> +
> ret = register_memory(mem);
>
> return ret;
> @@ -671,7 +682,7 @@ static int add_memory_block(unsigned long base_section_nr)
> if (section_count == 0)
> return 0;
> return init_memory_block(memory_block_id(base_section_nr),
> - MEM_ONLINE, 0);
> + MEM_ONLINE, 0, NULL);
> }
>
> static void unregister_memory(struct memory_block *memory)
> @@ -681,6 +692,11 @@ static void unregister_memory(struct memory_block *memory)
>
> WARN_ON(xa_erase(&memory_blocks, memory->dev.id) == NULL);
>
> + if (memory->group) {
> + refcount_dec(&memory->group->refcount);
> + memory->group = NULL;
Who freed the memory for the group?
> + }
> +
> /* drop the ref. we got via find_memory_block() */
> put_device(&memory->dev);
> device_unregister(&memory->dev);
> @@ -694,7 +710,8 @@ static void unregister_memory(struct memory_block *memory)
> * Called under device_hotplug_lock.
> */
> int create_memory_block_devices(unsigned long start, unsigned long size,
> - unsigned long vmemmap_pages)
> + unsigned long vmemmap_pages,
> + struct memory_group *group)
> {
> const unsigned long start_block_id = pfn_to_block_id(PFN_DOWN(start));
> unsigned long end_block_id = pfn_to_block_id(PFN_DOWN(start + size));
> @@ -707,7 +724,8 @@ int create_memory_block_devices(unsigned long start, unsigned long size,
> return -EINVAL;
>
> for (block_id = start_block_id; block_id != end_block_id; block_id++) {
> - ret = init_memory_block(block_id, MEM_OFFLINE, vmemmap_pages);
> + ret = init_memory_block(block_id, MEM_OFFLINE, vmemmap_pages,
> + group);
> if (ret)
> break;
> }
> @@ -891,3 +909,79 @@ int for_each_memory_block(void *arg, walk_memory_blocks_func_t func)
> return bus_for_each_dev(&memory_subsys, NULL, &cb_data,
> for_each_memory_block_cb);
> }
> +
> +static int register_memory_group(struct memory_group group)
> +{
> + struct memory_group *new_group;
> + uint32_t mgid;
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (!node_possible(group.nid))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + new_group = kzalloc(sizeof(group), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!new_group)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + *new_group = group;
You burried a memcpy here, why? Please be explicit as this is now a
dynamic structure.
> + refcount_set(&new_group->refcount, 1);
Why not just use a kref? You seem to be treating it as a kref would
work, right?
> +
> + ret = xa_alloc(&memory_groups, &mgid, new_group, xa_limit_31b,
> + GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (ret)
> + kfree(new_group);
> + return ret ? ret : mgid;
I hate ?: please spell this out:
if (ret)
return ret;
return mgid;
There, more obvious and you can read it in 10 years when you have to go
fix it up...
> +}
> +
> +int register_static_memory_group(int nid, unsigned long max_pages)
> +{
> + struct memory_group group = {
> + .nid = nid,
> + .s = {
> + .max_pages = max_pages,
> + },
> + };
> +
> + if (!max_pages)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + return register_memory_group(group);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(register_static_memory_group);
Let's make our global namespace a bit nicer:
memory_group_register_static()
memory_group_register_dynamic()
and so on. Use prefixes please, not suffixes.
> +
> +int register_dynamic_memory_group(int nid, unsigned long unit_pages)
> +{
> + struct memory_group group = {
> + .nid = nid,
> + .is_dynamic = true,
> + .d = {
> + .unit_pages = unit_pages,
> + },
> + };
> +
> + if (!unit_pages || !is_power_of_2(unit_pages) ||
> + unit_pages < PHYS_PFN(memory_block_size_bytes()))
> + return -EINVAL;
> + return register_memory_group(group);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(register_dynamic_memory_group);
> +
> +int unregister_memory_group(int mgid)
> +{
> + struct memory_group *group;
> +
> + if (mgid < 0)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + group = xa_load(&memory_groups, mgid);
> + if (!group || refcount_read(&group->refcount) > 1)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + xa_erase(&memory_groups, mgid);
> + kfree(group);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(unregister_memory_group);
memory_group_unregister()
> +
> +struct memory_group *get_memory_group(int mgid)
> +{
> + return xa_load(&memory_groups, mgid);
> +}
Global function?
> diff --git a/include/linux/memory.h b/include/linux/memory.h
> index 97e92e8b556a..6e20a6174fe5 100644
> --- a/include/linux/memory.h
> +++ b/include/linux/memory.h
> @@ -23,6 +23,42 @@
>
> #define MIN_MEMORY_BLOCK_SIZE (1UL << SECTION_SIZE_BITS)
>
> +struct memory_group {
> + /* Nid the whole group belongs to. */
> + int nid;
What is a "nid"?
> + /* References from memory blocks + 1. */
Blank line above this?
And put the structure comments in proper kernel doc so that others can
read them and we can verify it is correct over time.
> + refcount_t refcount;
> + /*
> + * Memory group type: static vs. dynamic.
> + *
> + * Static: All memory in the group belongs to a single unit, such as,
> + * a DIMM. All memory belonging to the group will be added in
> + * one go and removed in one go -- it's static.
> + *
> + * Dynamic: Memory within the group is added/removed dynamically in
> + * units of the specified granularity of at least one memory block.
> + */
> + bool is_dynamic;
> +
> + union {
> + struct {
> + /*
> + * Maximum number of pages we'll have in this static
> + * memory group.
> + */
> + unsigned long max_pages;
> + } s;
> + struct {
> + /*
> + * Unit in pages in which memory is added/removed in
> + * this dynamic memory group. This granularity defines
> + * the alignment of a unit in physical address space.
> + */
> + unsigned long unit_pages;
> + } d;
so is_dynamic determines which to use here? Please be explicit.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists