Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:8c0a:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id go10csp2238990pxb; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 10:26:09 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxi6u7Sw5uqr9MUfL0HyTtko9+8um65amm2VNXbkNMZXFPxNzb+lTNCqKywKXs6LesxLtGu X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:ea3:: with SMTP id ho35mr3549873ejc.219.1614968769738; Fri, 05 Mar 2021 10:26:09 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1614968769; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=G+gEuh59ogK06Eo4/OP7MWLiuH6Ws/rHVry7QUlxvnuW9CHBB6KxHLgDDe7M46ANjw 1Q7hjXLABq9WbT+3wFMhfgMgZUM7/YrUglMQwKHxP5gMu47rAL6cxDLckabnwnzuUqot vd57KeFM/dg0HN4kmYrtSD4XsfTogBAM0bjWFTF0MoUMfpZ5Iq7DKT2nJq6XEUlWYfNr ZmB9TZM+ZQfhO0j+/6vwbokEyy7RNexCLaHvm72TYWxOkEVplXnOVZuvM8k8PLzyeiNs s8BdrGBobaWhcBKkYWN0ZM/5mwvE+B7eU6dbTKSRtwqMIwuHX/0WHEZYzC56ChbD97TY jVIw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:organization :from:references:cc:to:subject:dkim-signature; bh=sNT9fJ85J6oSGdxkAJMQPYTV29ndRMM0I5qlalEdePA=; b=H4rphVxWtjGMTrOxd36b30FlR6Vvv/ha0U2SwX6Y5P7HNnR1cp08O++74jDelidYN8 XmAcp0n/pP+CNmtEgqpEyiKol1McWo2vrFurT3ffr7OvaCp4DbYFadsS5ogrOWpiyq35 atHpLaX2UGqQ517Z7MNG7VeC+c+13HuZ/tQ7HXcrustCHovkYjOpaSMh/ruAvrymUQ1k pw8m5mqwUAz5lR0BpHADeUW4cswaI0AYvQAEBUd9lhHzYU4FBJ8FBCe4NzAyO90XUqWH oQskh+FiVLQIKXbtt4vT2AThmz9bwl76PhXI0E3LNu7Bc4Bw7Bg68+uNh65G2xFj1652 n7KQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=XnVi1x3R; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 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. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id lr3si1760488ejb.514.2021.03.05.10.25.47; Fri, 05 Mar 2021 10:26:09 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=XnVi1x3R; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 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 S229992AbhCESYq (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 5 Mar 2021 13:24:46 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:45088 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230078AbhCESYj (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Mar 2021 13:24:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1614968678; 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; bh=sNT9fJ85J6oSGdxkAJMQPYTV29ndRMM0I5qlalEdePA=; b=XnVi1x3RvpNA6p41b49VfdAFlggSHp5B/IKk5JOip460pYL9qmBrCxgObKooVaGCxfeMRo Y2aMK1whpfOASUz6AqN5PXoSFCiUys6Hz1nURWCradzYtNBAuu0C3+XzZWLIK0U28pJ+Qk Mjy8HNecWf/SaBi9Hm0FqGZlsuA+8ng= 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-191-2JW58ZZ-Nb21e_7MNxD95g-1; Fri, 05 Mar 2021 13:24:34 -0500 X-MC-Unique: 2JW58ZZ-Nb21e_7MNxD95g-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9377D760C1; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 18:24:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.112.194] (ovpn-112-194.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.194]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9B551F456; Fri, 5 Mar 2021 18:24:21 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/2] arm64/mm: Fix pfn_valid() for ZONE_DEVICE based memory To: Catalin Marinas , Anshuman Khandual Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Will Deacon , Ard Biesheuvel , Mark Rutland , James Morse , Robin Murphy , =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgR2xpc3Nl?= , Dan Williams , Mike Rapoport , Veronika Kabatova References: <1614921898-4099-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <1614921898-4099-2-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20210305181322.GI23855@arm.com> From: David Hildenbrand Organization: Red Hat GmbH Message-ID: Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2021 19:24:21 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210305181322.GI23855@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 05.03.21 19:13, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 10:54:57AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> pfn_valid() validates a pfn but basically it checks for a valid struct page >> backing for that pfn. It should always return positive for memory ranges >> backed with struct page mapping. But currently pfn_valid() fails for all >> ZONE_DEVICE based memory types even though they have struct page mapping. >> >> pfn_valid() asserts that there is a memblock entry for a given pfn without >> MEMBLOCK_NOMAP flag being set. The problem with ZONE_DEVICE based memory is >> that they do not have memblock entries. Hence memblock_is_map_memory() will >> invariably fail via memblock_search() for a ZONE_DEVICE based address. This >> eventually fails pfn_valid() which is wrong. memblock_is_map_memory() needs >> to be skipped for such memory ranges. As ZONE_DEVICE memory gets hotplugged >> into the system via memremap_pages() called from a driver, their respective >> memory sections will not have SECTION_IS_EARLY set. >> >> Normal hotplug memory will never have MEMBLOCK_NOMAP set in their memblock >> regions. Because the flag MEMBLOCK_NOMAP was specifically designed and set >> for firmware reserved memory regions. memblock_is_map_memory() can just be >> skipped as its always going to be positive and that will be an optimization >> for the normal hotplug memory. Like ZONE_DEVICE based memory, all normal >> hotplugged memory too will not have SECTION_IS_EARLY set for their sections >> >> Skipping memblock_is_map_memory() for all non early memory sections would >> fix pfn_valid() problem for ZONE_DEVICE based memory and also improve its >> performance for normal hotplug memory as well. >> >> Cc: Catalin Marinas >> Cc: Will Deacon >> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel >> Cc: Robin Murphy >> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Acked-by: David Hildenbrand >> Fixes: 73b20c84d42d ("arm64: mm: implement pte_devmap support") >> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual >> --- >> arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 12 ++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> index 0ace5e68efba..5920c527845a 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >> @@ -230,6 +230,18 @@ int pfn_valid(unsigned long pfn) >> >> if (!valid_section(__pfn_to_section(pfn))) >> return 0; >> + >> + /* >> + * ZONE_DEVICE memory does not have the memblock entries. >> + * memblock_is_map_memory() check for ZONE_DEVICE based >> + * addresses will always fail. Even the normal hotplugged >> + * memory will never have MEMBLOCK_NOMAP flag set in their >> + * memblock entries. Skip memblock search for all non early >> + * memory sections covering all of hotplug memory including >> + * both normal and ZONE_DEVICE based. >> + */ >> + if (!early_section(__pfn_to_section(pfn))) >> + return pfn_section_valid(__pfn_to_section(pfn), pfn); > > Would something like this work instead: > > if (online_device_section(ms)) > return 1; > > to avoid the assumptions around early_section()? > Please keep online section logic out of pfn valid logic. Tow different things. (and rather not diverge too much from generic pfn_valid() - we want to achieve the opposite in the long term, merging both implementations) -- Thanks, David / dhildenb