Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754015AbbFVQVu (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2015 12:21:50 -0400 Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.180.65]:35160 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752597AbbFVQVa (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2015 12:21:30 -0400 Message-ID: <55883605.5020706@sgi.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 09:21:25 -0700 From: Mike Travis User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Toshi Kani , tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org CC: roland@purestorage.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@ml01.01.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Clive Harding , Russ Anderson Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm, x86: Remove region_is_ram() call from ioremap References: <1434750245-6304-1-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com> <1434750245-6304-3-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com> In-Reply-To: <1434750245-6304-3-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hp.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4558 Lines: 114 On 6/19/2015 2:44 PM, Toshi Kani wrote: > __ioremap_caller() calls region_is_ram() to look up the resource > to check if a target range is RAM, which was added as an additinal > check to improve the lookup performance over page_is_ram() (commit > 906e36c5c717 "x86: use optimized ioresource lookup in ioremap > function"). > > __ioremap_caller() then calls walk_system_ram_range(), which had > replaced page_is_ram() to improve the lookup performance (commit > c81c8a1eeede "x86, ioremap: Speed up check for RAM pages"). > > Since both functions walk through the resource table, there is > no need to call the two functions. Furthermore, region_is_ram() > has bugs and always returns with -1. This makes > walk_system_ram_range() as the only check being used. Do you have an example of a failing case? Also, I didn't know that IOREMAP'd addresses were allowed to be on non-page boundaries? Here's the comment and reason for the patches from Patch 0: <<< We have a large university system in the UK that is experiencing very long delays modprobing the driver for a specific I/O device. The delay is from 8-10 minutes per device and there are 31 devices in the system. This 4 to 5 hour delay in starting up those I/O devices is very much a burden on the customer. ... The problem was tracked down to a very slow IOREMAP operation and the excessively long ioresource lookup to insure that the user is not attempting to ioremap RAM. These patches provide a speed up to that function. >>> The speed up was pretty dramatic, I think to about 15-20 minutes (the test was done by our local CS person in the UK). I think this would prove the function was working since it would have fallen back to the previous page_is_ram function and the 4 to 5 hour startup. If there is a failure, it would be better for all to fix the specific bug and not re-introduce the original problem. Perhaps drop to page is ram if the address is not page aligned? > Hence, remove the call to region_is_ram() from __ioremap_caller(). > > Note, removing the call to region_is_ram() is also necessary > to fix the bugs in region_is_ram(). walk_system_ram_range() > requires RAM ranges aligned by the page size in the resource > table. e820_reserve_setup_data() updates the e820 table by > allocating a separate entry to each data region in setup_data, > which is not page-aligned. Therefore, walk_system_ram_range() > is unable to detect the RAM ranges in setup_data. This > restriction has allowed multiple uses of ioremap() to map > setup_data. Using fixed region_is_ram() will cause these callers > to start failing. After all ioremap to setup_data are converted, > __ioremap_caller() may call region_is_ram() instead. > > Signed-off-by: Toshi Kani > --- > arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c | 24 ++++++------------------ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c b/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c > index 56f8af7..928867e 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c > +++ b/arch/x86/mm/ioremap.c > @@ -89,7 +89,6 @@ static void __iomem *__ioremap_caller(resource_size_t phys_addr, > pgprot_t prot; > int retval; > void __iomem *ret_addr; > - int ram_region; > > /* Don't allow wraparound or zero size */ > last_addr = phys_addr + size - 1; > @@ -112,26 +111,15 @@ static void __iomem *__ioremap_caller(resource_size_t phys_addr, > /* > * Don't allow anybody to remap normal RAM that we're using.. > */ > - /* First check if whole region can be identified as RAM or not */ > - ram_region = region_is_ram(phys_addr, size); > - if (ram_region > 0) { > - WARN_ONCE(1, "ioremap on RAM at 0x%lx - 0x%lx\n", > - (unsigned long int)phys_addr, > - (unsigned long int)last_addr); > - return NULL; > - } > - > - /* If could not be identified(-1), check page by page */ > - if (ram_region < 0) { > - pfn = phys_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT; > - last_pfn = last_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT; > - if (walk_system_ram_range(pfn, last_pfn - pfn + 1, NULL, > + pfn = phys_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT; > + last_pfn = last_addr >> PAGE_SHIFT; > + if (walk_system_ram_range(pfn, last_pfn - pfn + 1, NULL, > __ioremap_check_ram) == 1) { > - WARN_ONCE(1, "ioremap on RAM at 0x%llx - 0x%llx\n", > + WARN_ONCE(1, "ioremap on RAM at 0x%llx - 0x%llx\n", > phys_addr, last_addr); > - return NULL; > - } > + return NULL; > } > + > /* > * Mappings have to be page-aligned > */ > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/