Message-ID: <abd16b950ca744b081fc9f545977b8fa@EXMBX066.cuchost.com>
Date:   Tue, 28 Feb 2023 07:29:40 +0000
From:   JeeHeng Sia <jeeheng.sia@...rfivetech.com>
To:     Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>
CC:     "paul.walmsley@...ive.com" <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        "palmer@...belt.com" <palmer@...belt.com>,
        "aou@...s.berkeley.edu" <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
        "linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Leyfoon Tan <leyfoon.tan@...rfivetech.com>,
        Mason Huo <mason.huo@...rfivetech.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 4/4] RISC-V: Add arch functions to support
 hibernation/suspend-to-disk



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, 28 February, 2023 3:19 PM
> To: JeeHeng Sia <jeeheng.sia@...rfivetech.com>
> Cc: paul.walmsley@...ive.com; palmer@...belt.com; aou@...s.berkeley.edu; linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; Leyfoon Tan <leyfoon.tan@...rfivetech.com>; Mason Huo <mason.huo@...rfivetech.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] RISC-V: Add arch functions to support hibernation/suspend-to-disk
> 
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 05:33:32AM +0000, JeeHeng Sia wrote:
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>
> > > Sent: Tuesday, 28 February, 2023 1:05 PM
> > > To: JeeHeng Sia <jeeheng.sia@...rfivetech.com>
> > > Cc: paul.walmsley@...ive.com; palmer@...belt.com; aou@...s.berkeley.edu; linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org; linux-
> > > kernel@...r.kernel.org; Leyfoon Tan <leyfoon.tan@...rfivetech.com>; Mason Huo <mason.huo@...rfivetech.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] RISC-V: Add arch functions to support hibernation/suspend-to-disk
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 01:32:53AM +0000, JeeHeng Sia wrote:
> > > > > > > > 	load image;
> > > > > > > > loop:	Create pbe chain, return error if failed;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This loop pseudocode is incomplete. It's
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > loop:
> > > > > > >         if (swsusp_page_is_forbidden(page) && swsusp_page_is_free(page))
> > > > > > > 	   return page_address(page);
> > > > > > > 	Create pbe chain, return error if failed;
> > > > > > > 	...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > which I pointed out explicitly in my last reply. Also, as I asked in my
> > > > > > > last reply (and have been asking four times now, albeit less explicitly
> > > > > > > the first two times), how do we know at least one PBE will be linked?
> > > > > > 1 PBE correspond to 1 page, you shouldn't expect only 1 page is saved.
> > > > >
> > > > > I know PBEs correspond to pages. *Why* should I not expect only one page
> > > > > is saved? Or, more importantly, why should I expect more than zero pages
> > > > > are saved?
> > > > >
> > > > > Convincing answers might be because we *always* put the restore code in
> > > > > pages which get added to the PBE list or that the original page tables
> > > > > *always* get put in pages which get added to the PBE list. It's not very
> > > > > convincing to simply *assume* that at least one random page will always
> > > > > meet the PBE list criteria.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hibernation core will do the calculation. If the PBEs (restore_pblist) linked successfully, the hibernated image will be restore
> else
> > > > > normal boot will take place.
> > > > > > > Or, even more specifically this time, where is the proof that for each
> > > > > > > hibernation resume, there exists some page such that
> > > > > > > !swsusp_page_is_forbidden(page) or !swsusp_page_is_free(page) is true?
> > > > > > forbidden_pages and free_pages are not contributed to the restore_pblist (as you already aware from the code). Infact, the
> > > > > forbidden_pages and free_pages are not save into the disk.
> > > > >
> > > > > Exactly, so those pages are *not* going to contribute to the greater than
> > > > > zero pages. What I've been asking for, from the beginning, is to know
> > > > > which page(s) are known to *always* contribute to the list. Or, IOW, how
> > > > > do you know the PBE list isn't empty, a.k.a restore_pblist isn't NULL?
> > > > Well, this is keep going around in a circle, thought the answer is in the hibernation code. restore_pblist get the pointer from the
> PBE,
> > > and the PBE already checked for validity.
> > >
> > > It keeps going around in circles because you keep avoiding my question by
> > > pointing out trivial linked list code. I'm not worried about the linked
> > > list code being correct. My concern is that you're using a linked list
> > > with an assumption that it is not empty. My question has been all along,
> > > how do you know it's not empty?
> > >
> > > I'll change the way I ask this time. Please take a look at your PBE list
> > > and let me know if there are PBEs on it that must be there on each
> > > hibernation resume, e.g. the resume code page is there or whatever.
> > >
> > > > Can I suggest you to submit a patch to the hibernation core?
> > >
> > > Why? What's wrong with it?
> > Kindly let me draw 2 scenarios for you. Option 1 is to add the restore_pblist checking to the hibernation core and option 2 is to add
> restore_pblist checking to the arch solution
> > Although I really don't think it is needed. But if you really wanted to add the checking, I would suggest to go with option 1. again, I
> really think that it is not needed!
> 
> This entire email thread is because you've first coded, and now stated,
> that you don't think the PBE list will ever be empty. And now, below, I
> see you're proposing to return an error when the PBE list is empty, why?
> If there's nothing in the PBE list, then there's nothing to do for it.
> Why is that an error condition?
> 
> Please explain to me why you think the PBE list *must* not be empty
> (which is what I've been asking for over and over). OIOW, are there
> any pages you have in mind which the resume kernel always uses and
> are also always going to end up in the suspend image? I don't know,
> but I assume clean, file-backed pages do not get added to the suspend
> image, which would rule out most kernel code pages. Also, many pages
> written during boot (which is where the resume kernel is at resume time)
> were no longer resident at hibernate time, so they won't be in the
> suspend image either. While it's quite likely I'm missing something
> obvious, I'd rather be told what that is than to assume the PBE list
> will never be empty. Which is why I keep asking about it...
The answer already in the Linux kernel hibernation core, do you need me to write a white paper to explain in detail or you need a conference call? 
> 
> Thanks,
> drew
> 
> >
> > 	//Option 1
> > 	//Pseudocode to illustrate the image loading
> > 	initialize restore_pblist to null;
> > 	initialize safe_pages_list to null;
> > 	Allocate safe page list, return error if failed;
> > 	load image;
> > loop:	Create pbe chain, return error if failed;
> > 	assign orig_addr and safe_page to pbe;
> > 	link pbe to restore_pblist;
> > 	/* Add checking here */
> > 	return error if restore_pblist equal to null;
> > 	return pbe to handle->buffer;
> > 	check handle->buffer;
> > 	goto loop if no error else return with error;
> >
> > 	//option 2
> > 	//Pseudocode to illustrate the image loading
> > 	initialize restore_pblist to null;
> > 	initialize safe_pages_list to null;
> > 	Allocate safe page list, return error if failed;
> > 	load image;
> > loop:	Create pbe chain, return error if failed;
> > 	assign orig_addr and safe_page to pbe;
> > 	link pbe to restore_pblist;
> > 	return pbe to handle->buffer;
> > 	check handle->buffer;
> > 	goto loop if no error else return with error;
> > 	everything works correctly, continue the rest of the operation
> > 	invoke swsusp_arch_resume
> >
> > 	//@...usp_arch_resume()
> > loop2: return error if restore_pblist is null
> > 	increment restore_pblist and goto loop2
> > 	create temp_pg_table
> > 	continue the rest of the resume operation
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > drew

Powered by blists - more mailing lists