Received: by 2002:a25:8b91:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j17csp3788465ybl; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 02:39:08 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqz+QgvRoGnoYpa6AS8ltzNCh2REd/VO10jONooc2wqNAHRNb3WbmdKsJ+PZxnyTvgQca1JH X-Received: by 2002:a9d:7b4e:: with SMTP id f14mr12824849oto.355.1578911948287; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 02:39:08 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1578911948; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=MYUH5NSQ18YoFTL9bExwd9VyvVRxHLfVawNRvaN/gCqVGRPq5evhc81vI/06JCcGbt uI/wyTto9cAAFfi+2zJmgByUfmOBIuuvMzNVXtzA62xfElAuYPiHRgX3s66KofYJhEvZ MjORVEesIGTRR3ZWu7COk8MHE/46qO7T+C2uD4wAZM6N9gm9QYLoAewZNIfYkSUMsBk+ riVeAuQglmVHRlBFU9m/Qg80e8uzzGdIYlGuLOIYfbmTRbF2WqOCDHfdsTUr5IT09UoE 7f3HsiWIMW0mt+WklLrpL5Lci/pEqVYJUa1splHIPj/PxBfIkafRt/15tCV1RVgSGUSU l2Sw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:organization:autocrypt:from:references:cc:to:subject :dkim-signature; bh=G2h6Lb5fPhYtedfSQGlHd/cyPn0SviTyjivOO/bVcUY=; b=fzTTDnuXYeY2+FES/UZE9RhaXtxroO4xq/1rhJHGMswhEIp68KghlaDHA68Q4/CQbW bI/UcdtFAemwIBTEGq5jluEYXhdZmTZwZp+0dMz6BzpuNiamgn/P8MGW7fhCmwxqmNK6 aBfhfg3RPXsl8epcFzx0GzsPg/7XeE0A5I9sg5WGdzTUF4DBFXsj1Wt1cUWagddqmtW4 y0dFh+WNet6TYe//wDfb1l5+lLlMnXlDy4HXLi2LkDVZKXw5ycOTaXdTusG/gWIcU7Ot SN25WT7piT1aimq1bfxFvq9gfQumbZVH9sGaXU9ILRVjms9ehL3m21Vx+97EU55nPLvr 5Gfg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=Ls1QTxAb; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id k7si5134777oib.115.2020.01.13.02.38.56; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 02:39:08 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=Ls1QTxAb; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=redhat.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727494AbgAMKiC (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 13 Jan 2020 05:38:02 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120]:40777 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726946AbgAMKiB (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jan 2020 05:38:01 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1578911880; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:autocrypt:autocrypt; bh=G2h6Lb5fPhYtedfSQGlHd/cyPn0SviTyjivOO/bVcUY=; b=Ls1QTxAb06RDJxfYWE5I0IGJSGkuut4vjT72ZcrPIsX5P04CgqXp2RdqavqN4Wbv9ccpT7 Cou8ArB53sFNyPWv1y4vd808tTm2PXPYQz2xyr+ShYt5i0rE0uVoD7looa3vRjwpazxqec sgNXjWMkf/54mmgTsHRw6lDZ0tbXiE8= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-373-Ehp-WPu7NuGSBsuo0pmOrg-1; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 05:37:57 -0500 X-MC-Unique: Ehp-WPu7NuGSBsuo0pmOrg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEE6C8D7E43; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 10:37:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.117.201] (ovpn-117-201.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.201]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02C9D7BA50; Mon, 13 Jan 2020 10:37:48 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH V11 1/5] mm/hotplug: Introduce arch callback validating the hot remove range To: Anshuman Khandual , David Hildenbrand Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, cai@lca.pw, logang@deltatee.com, cpandya@codeaurora.org, arunks@codeaurora.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com, mgorman@techsingularity.net, osalvador@suse.de, ard.biesheuvel@arm.com, steve.capper@arm.com, broonie@kernel.org, valentin.schneider@arm.com, robin.murphy@arm.com, steven.price@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, ira.weiny@intel.com References: <6f0efddc-f124-58ca-28b6-4632469cf992@arm.com> <3C3BE5FA-0CFC-4C90-8657-63EF5B680B0B@redhat.com> <6b8fb779-31e8-1b63-85a8-9f6c93a04494@arm.com> From: David Hildenbrand Autocrypt: addr=david@redhat.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQINBFXLn5EBEAC+zYvAFJxCBY9Tr1xZgcESmxVNI/0ffzE/ZQOiHJl6mGkmA1R7/uUpiCjJ dBrn+lhhOYjjNefFQou6478faXE6o2AhmebqT4KiQoUQFV4R7y1KMEKoSyy8hQaK1umALTdL QZLQMzNE74ap+GDK0wnacPQFpcG1AE9RMq3aeErY5tujekBS32jfC/7AnH7I0v1v1TbbK3Gp XNeiN4QroO+5qaSr0ID2sz5jtBLRb15RMre27E1ImpaIv2Jw8NJgW0k/D1RyKCwaTsgRdwuK Kx/Y91XuSBdz0uOyU/S8kM1+ag0wvsGlpBVxRR/xw/E8M7TEwuCZQArqqTCmkG6HGcXFT0V9 PXFNNgV5jXMQRwU0O/ztJIQqsE5LsUomE//bLwzj9IVsaQpKDqW6TAPjcdBDPLHvriq7kGjt WhVhdl0qEYB8lkBEU7V2Yb+SYhmhpDrti9Fq1EsmhiHSkxJcGREoMK/63r9WLZYI3+4W2rAc UucZa4OT27U5ZISjNg3Ev0rxU5UH2/pT4wJCfxwocmqaRr6UYmrtZmND89X0KigoFD/XSeVv jwBRNjPAubK9/k5NoRrYqztM9W6sJqrH8+UWZ1Idd/DdmogJh0gNC0+N42Za9yBRURfIdKSb B3JfpUqcWwE7vUaYrHG1nw54pLUoPG6sAA7Mehl3nd4pZUALHwARAQABtCREYXZpZCBIaWxk ZW5icmFuZCA8ZGF2aWRAcmVkaGF0LmNvbT6JAlgEEwEIAEICGwMFCQlmAYAGCwkIBwMCBhUI AgkKCwQWAgMBAh4BAheAFiEEG9nKrXNcTDpGDfzKTd4Q9wD/g1oFAl3pImkCGQEACgkQTd4Q 9wD/g1o+VA//SFvIHUAvul05u6wKv/pIR6aICPdpF9EIgEU448g+7FfDgQwcEny1pbEzAmiw zAXIQ9H0NZh96lcq+yDLtONnXk/bEYWHHUA014A1wqcYNRY8RvY1+eVHb0uu0KYQoXkzvu+s Dncuguk470XPnscL27hs8PgOP6QjG4jt75K2LfZ0eAqTOUCZTJxA8A7E9+XTYuU0hs7QVrWJ jQdFxQbRMrYz7uP8KmTK9/Cnvqehgl4EzyRaZppshruKMeyheBgvgJd5On1wWq4ZUV5PFM4x II3QbD3EJfWbaJMR55jI9dMFa+vK7MFz3rhWOkEx/QR959lfdRSTXdxs8V3zDvChcmRVGN8U Vo93d1YNtWnA9w6oCW1dnDZ4kgQZZSBIjp6iHcA08apzh7DPi08jL7M9UQByeYGr8KuR4i6e RZI6xhlZerUScVzn35ONwOC91VdYiQgjemiVLq1WDDZ3B7DIzUZ4RQTOaIWdtXBWb8zWakt/ ztGhsx0e39Gvt3391O1PgcA7ilhvqrBPemJrlb9xSPPRbaNAW39P8ws/UJnzSJqnHMVxbRZC Am4add/SM+OCP0w3xYss1jy9T+XdZa0lhUvJfLy7tNcjVG/sxkBXOaSC24MFPuwnoC9WvCVQ ZBxouph3kqc4Dt5X1EeXVLeba+466P1fe1rC8MbcwDkoUo65Ag0EVcufkQEQAOfX3n0g0fZz Bgm/S2zF/kxQKCEKP8ID+Vz8sy2GpDvveBq4H2Y34XWsT1zLJdvqPI4af4ZSMxuerWjXbVWb T6d4odQIG0fKx4F8NccDqbgHeZRNajXeeJ3R7gAzvWvQNLz4piHrO/B4tf8svmRBL0ZB5P5A 2uhdwLU3NZuK22zpNn4is87BPWF8HhY0L5fafgDMOqnf4guJVJPYNPhUFzXUbPqOKOkL8ojk CXxkOFHAbjstSK5Ca3fKquY3rdX3DNo+EL7FvAiw1mUtS+5GeYE+RMnDCsVFm/C7kY8c2d0G NWkB9pJM5+mnIoFNxy7YBcldYATVeOHoY4LyaUWNnAvFYWp08dHWfZo9WCiJMuTfgtH9tc75 7QanMVdPt6fDK8UUXIBLQ2TWr/sQKE9xtFuEmoQGlE1l6bGaDnnMLcYu+Asp3kDT0w4zYGsx 5r6XQVRH4+5N6eHZiaeYtFOujp5n+pjBaQK7wUUjDilPQ5QMzIuCL4YjVoylWiBNknvQWBXS lQCWmavOT9sttGQXdPCC5ynI+1ymZC1ORZKANLnRAb0NH/UCzcsstw2TAkFnMEbo9Zu9w7Kv AxBQXWeXhJI9XQssfrf4Gusdqx8nPEpfOqCtbbwJMATbHyqLt7/oz/5deGuwxgb65pWIzufa N7eop7uh+6bezi+rugUI+w6DABEBAAGJAiUEGAECAA8FAlXLn5ECGwwFCQlmAYAACgkQTd4Q 9wD/g1qA6w/+M+ggFv+JdVsz5+ZIc6MSyGUozASX+bmIuPeIecc9UsFRatc91LuJCKMkD9Uv GOcWSeFpLrSGRQ1Z7EMzFVU//qVs6uzhsNk0RYMyS0B6oloW3FpyQ+zOVylFWQCzoyyf227y GW8HnXunJSC+4PtlL2AY4yZjAVAPLK2l6mhgClVXTQ/S7cBoTQKP+jvVJOoYkpnFxWE9pn4t H5QIFk7Ip8TKr5k3fXVWk4lnUi9MTF/5L/mWqdyIO1s7cjharQCstfWCzWrVeVctpVoDfJWp 4LwTuQ5yEM2KcPeElLg5fR7WB2zH97oI6/Ko2DlovmfQqXh9xWozQt0iGy5tWzh6I0JrlcxJ ileZWLccC4XKD1037Hy2FLAjzfoWgwBLA6ULu0exOOdIa58H4PsXtkFPrUF980EEibUp0zFz GotRVekFAceUaRvAj7dh76cToeZkfsjAvBVb4COXuhgX6N4pofgNkW2AtgYu1nUsPAo+NftU CxrhjHtLn4QEBpkbErnXQyMjHpIatlYGutVMS91XTQXYydCh5crMPs7hYVsvnmGHIaB9ZMfB njnuI31KBiLUks+paRkHQlFcgS2N3gkRBzH7xSZ+t7Re3jvXdXEzKBbQ+dC3lpJB0wPnyMcX FOTT3aZT7IgePkt5iC/BKBk3hqKteTnJFeVIT7EC+a6YUFg= Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: <19194427-1295-3596-2c2c-463c4adf4f35@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 11:37:48 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.3.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6b8fb779-31e8-1b63-85a8-9f6c93a04494@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 13.01.20 10:50, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 01/13/2020 02:44 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >> >> >>> Am 13.01.2020 um 10:10 schrieb Anshuman Khandual : >>> >>> =EF=BB=BF >>> >>>> On 01/10/2020 02:12 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>>>> On 10.01.20 04:09, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >>>>> Currently there are two interfaces to initiate memory range hot rem= oval i.e >>>>> remove_memory() and __remove_memory() which then calls try_remove_m= emory(). >>>>> Platform gets called with arch_remove_memory() to tear down require= d kernel >>>>> page tables and other arch specific procedures. But there are platf= orms >>>>> like arm64 which might want to prevent removal of certain specific = memory >>>>> ranges irrespective of their present usage or movability properties= . >>>> >>>> Why? Is this only relevant for boot memory? I hope so, otherwise the >>>> arch code needs fixing IMHO. >>> >>> Right, it is relevant only for the boot memory on arm64 platform. But= this >>> new arch callback makes it flexible to reject any given memory range. >>> >>>> >>>> If it's only boot memory, we should disallow offlining instead via a >>>> memory notifier - much cleaner. >>> >>> Dont have much detail understanding of MMU notifier mechanism but fro= m some >>> initial reading, it seems like we need to have a mm_struct for a noti= fier >>> to monitor various events on the page table. Just wondering how a phy= sical >>> memory range like boot memory can be monitored because it can be used= both >>> for for kernel (init_mm) or user space process at same time. Is there= some >>> mechanism we could do this ? >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Current arch call back arch_remove_memory() is too late in the proc= ess to >>>>> abort memory hot removal as memory block devices and firmware memor= y map >>>>> entries would have already been removed. Platforms should be able t= o abort >>>>> the process before taking the mem_hotplug_lock with mem_hotplug_beg= in(). >>>>> This essentially requires a new arch callback for memory range vali= dation. >>>> >>>> I somewhat dislike this very much. Memory removal should never fail = if >>>> used sanely. See e.g., __remove_memory(), it will BUG() whenever >>>> something like that would strike. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> This differentiates memory range validation between memory hot add = and hot >>>>> remove paths before carving out a new helper check_hotremove_memory= _range() >>>>> which incorporates a new arch callback. This call back provides pla= tforms >>>>> an opportunity to refuse memory removal at the very onset. In futur= e the >>>>> same principle can be extended for memory hot add path if required. >>>>> >>>>> Platforms can choose to override this callback in order to reject s= pecific >>>>> memory ranges from removal or can just fallback to a default implem= entation >>>>> which allows removal of all memory ranges. >>>> >>>> I suspect we want really want to disallow offlining instead. E.g., I >>> >>> If boot memory pages can be prevented from being offlined for sure, t= hen it >>> would indirectly definitely prevent hot remove process as well. >>> >>>> remember s390x does that with certain areas needed for dumping/kexec= . >>> >>> Could not find any references to mmu_notifier in arch/s390 or any oth= er arch >>> for that matter apart from KVM (which has an user space component), c= ould you >>> please give some pointers ? >> >> Memory (hotplug) notifier, not MMU notifier :) >=20 > They are so similarly named :) >=20 >> >> Not on my notebook right now, grep for MEM_GOING_OFFLINE, that should = be it. >> >=20 > Got it, thanks ! But we will still need boot memory enumeration via MEM= BLOCK_BOOT > to reject affected offline requests in the callback. Do you really need that? We have SECTION_IS_EARLY. You could iterate all involved sections (for which you are getting notified) and check if any one of these is marked SECTION_IS_EARLY. then, it was added during boot and not via add_memory()= . --=20 Thanks, David / dhildenb