Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757922AbcDHQnX (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2016 12:43:23 -0400 Received: from g4t3426.houston.hp.com ([15.201.208.54]:58785 "EHLO g4t3426.houston.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751812AbcDHQnW (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Apr 2016 12:43:22 -0400 Message-ID: <1460133294.20338.82.camel@hpe.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/mm/pat: Fix BUG_ON in mmap_mem on QEMU/i386 From: Toshi Kani To: Borislav Petkov Cc: mingo@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, ying.huang@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2016 10:34:54 -0600 In-Reply-To: <1459869842.13914.39.camel@hpe.com> References: <1459549185-14911-1-git-send-email-toshi.kani@hpe.com> <20160405110947.GB10109@pd.tnic> <1459869842.13914.39.camel@hpe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.18.5.2 (3.18.5.2-1.fc23) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1600 Lines: 41 On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 09:24 -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > +xen-devl > > On Tue, 2016-04-05 at 13:09 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 04:19:45PM -0600, Toshi Kani wrote: > > >  : > > > > > > When the system does not have much memory, 'high_memory' points to > > > > What does "much memory" mean, exactly? > > I meant to say when a 32-bit system does not have ZONE_HIGHMEM, > __pa(high_memory) points to the maximum memory address + 1. > > I will remove this sentence since it is irrelevant to this BUG_ON.  Even > if a 32-bit system does have ZONE_HIGHMEM, slow_virt_to_phys() still > returns 0 for high_memory because it is set to the maximum direct mapped > address + 1 in this case.  This address is not covered by page table, > either. > > But this made me realized that this high_memory check can be harmful in > such case, ie. __pa(high_memory) is not the maximum memory address when > ZONE_HIGHMEM is present. > > I assume when this code block was originally added, legacy systems > without MTRRs did not have ZONE_HIGHMEM.  However, MTRRs are also > disabled on Xen. Reactivating this code may cause an issue on Xen 32-bit > guests with ZONE_HIGHMEM. > > Question to Xen folks: Does Xen support 32-bit guests with ZONE_HIGHMEM? > > If yes, a safer fix may be to remove this code block since it was > deadcode anyway... I have not heard a confirmation from Xen folks, but I believe ZONE_HIGHMEM is supported on 32-bit Xen guests.  So, unless someone has an objection, I am going to remove this code block in the next version of this patch. Thanks, -Toshi