From: iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com (Joonsoo Kim)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v5 3/3] ARM: mm: use static_vm for managing static mapped areas
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 14:05:27 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130206050527.GA8249@lge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130206020707.GB4325@lge.com>
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 11:07:07AM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> Hello, Rob.
>
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 01:12:51PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On 02/05/2013 12:13 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Tue, 5 Feb 2013, Rob Herring wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 02/04/2013 10:44 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, 5 Feb 2013, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> A static mapped area is ARM-specific, so it is better not to use
> > >>>> generic vmalloc data structure, that is, vmlist and vmlist_lock
> > >>>> for managing static mapped area. And it causes some needless overhead and
> > >>>> reducing this overhead is better idea.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Now, we have newly introduced static_vm infrastructure.
> > >>>> With it, we don't need to iterate all mapped areas. Instead, we just
> > >>>> iterate static mapped areas. It helps to reduce an overhead of finding
> > >>>> matched area. And architecture dependency on vmalloc layer is removed,
> > >>>> so it will help to maintainability for vmalloc layer.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> > >>
> > >> [snip]
> > >>
> > >>>> @@ -859,17 +864,12 @@ static void __init pci_reserve_io(void)
> > >>>> {
> > >>>> struct vm_struct *vm;
> > >>>> unsigned long addr;
> > >>>> + struct static_vm *svm;
> > >>>>
> > >>>> - /* we're still single threaded hence no lock needed here */
> > >>>> - for (vm = vmlist; vm; vm = vm->next) {
> > >>>> - if (!(vm->flags & VM_ARM_STATIC_MAPPING))
> > >>>> - continue;
> > >>>> - addr = (unsigned long)vm->addr;
> > >>>> - addr &= ~(SZ_2M - 1);
> > >>>> - if (addr == PCI_IO_VIRT_BASE)
> > >>>> - return;
> > >>>> + svm = find_static_vm_vaddr((void *)PCI_IO_VIRT_BASE);
> > >>>> + if (svm)
> > >>>> + return;
> > >>>>
> > >>>> - }
> > >>>>
> > >>>> vm_reserve_area_early(PCI_IO_VIRT_BASE, SZ_2M, pci_reserve_io);
> > >>>> }
> > >>>
> > >>> The replacement code is not equivalent. I can't recall why the original
> > >>> is as it is, but it doesn't look right to me. The 2MB round down
> > >>> certainly looks suspicious.
> > >>
> > >> The PCI mapping is at a fixed, aligned 2MB mapping. If we find any
> > >> virtual address within that region already mapped, it is an error.
> > > Ah, OK. This wasn't clear looking at the code.
> > >> We probably should have had a WARN here.
> > >
> > > Indeed.
> > >
>
> Okay.
> I should fix it to find any mapping within PCI reserved region.
Ah...
Above comment is my mistake.
If there is a region already mapped within PCI reserved region and
it is not found by find_static_vm_vaddr(), vm_area_add_early() hit BUG_ON().
So, to leave find_static_vm_vaddr() is safe.
> But, I think that it is not an error.
> Now, I see your original commit 'c2794437091a4fda72c4a4f3567dd728dcc0c3c9'
> and find below message.
>
> "Platforms which need early i/o mapping (e.g. for vga console) can call
> pci_map_io_early in their .map_io function."
>
> Therfore, for some platform, it is possible that there is a mapping within
> PCI reserved range.
>
> So, I will not add WARN here.
>
> I will fix and re-send v6 with your ACK.
>
> Thanks for review.
>
> > >>>
> > >>> The replacement code should be better. However I'd like you to get an
> > >>> ACK from Rob Herring as well for this patch.
> > >>
> > >> It doesn't appear to me the above case is handled. The virt addr is
> > >> checked whether it is within an existing mapping, but not whether the
> > >> new mapping would overlap an existing mapping. It would be good to check
> > >> for this generically rather than specifically for the PCI i/o mapping.
> > >
> > > Agreed. However that is checked already in vm_area_add_early().
> > > Therefore the overlap test here is redundant.
> >
> > Ah, right. In that case:
> >
> > Acked-by: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>
> >
> > Rob
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
To: Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>
Cc: Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>,
Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] ARM: mm: use static_vm for managing static mapped areas
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 14:05:27 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130206050527.GA8249@lge.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130206020707.GB4325@lge.com>
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 11:07:07AM +0900, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> Hello, Rob.
>
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 01:12:51PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On 02/05/2013 12:13 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Tue, 5 Feb 2013, Rob Herring wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 02/04/2013 10:44 PM, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, 5 Feb 2013, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> A static mapped area is ARM-specific, so it is better not to use
> > >>>> generic vmalloc data structure, that is, vmlist and vmlist_lock
> > >>>> for managing static mapped area. And it causes some needless overhead and
> > >>>> reducing this overhead is better idea.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Now, we have newly introduced static_vm infrastructure.
> > >>>> With it, we don't need to iterate all mapped areas. Instead, we just
> > >>>> iterate static mapped areas. It helps to reduce an overhead of finding
> > >>>> matched area. And architecture dependency on vmalloc layer is removed,
> > >>>> so it will help to maintainability for vmalloc layer.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>
> > >>
> > >> [snip]
> > >>
> > >>>> @@ -859,17 +864,12 @@ static void __init pci_reserve_io(void)
> > >>>> {
> > >>>> struct vm_struct *vm;
> > >>>> unsigned long addr;
> > >>>> + struct static_vm *svm;
> > >>>>
> > >>>> - /* we're still single threaded hence no lock needed here */
> > >>>> - for (vm = vmlist; vm; vm = vm->next) {
> > >>>> - if (!(vm->flags & VM_ARM_STATIC_MAPPING))
> > >>>> - continue;
> > >>>> - addr = (unsigned long)vm->addr;
> > >>>> - addr &= ~(SZ_2M - 1);
> > >>>> - if (addr == PCI_IO_VIRT_BASE)
> > >>>> - return;
> > >>>> + svm = find_static_vm_vaddr((void *)PCI_IO_VIRT_BASE);
> > >>>> + if (svm)
> > >>>> + return;
> > >>>>
> > >>>> - }
> > >>>>
> > >>>> vm_reserve_area_early(PCI_IO_VIRT_BASE, SZ_2M, pci_reserve_io);
> > >>>> }
> > >>>
> > >>> The replacement code is not equivalent. I can't recall why the original
> > >>> is as it is, but it doesn't look right to me. The 2MB round down
> > >>> certainly looks suspicious.
> > >>
> > >> The PCI mapping is at a fixed, aligned 2MB mapping. If we find any
> > >> virtual address within that region already mapped, it is an error.
> > > Ah, OK. This wasn't clear looking at the code.
> > >> We probably should have had a WARN here.
> > >
> > > Indeed.
> > >
>
> Okay.
> I should fix it to find any mapping within PCI reserved region.
Ah...
Above comment is my mistake.
If there is a region already mapped within PCI reserved region and
it is not found by find_static_vm_vaddr(), vm_area_add_early() hit BUG_ON().
So, to leave find_static_vm_vaddr() is safe.
> But, I think that it is not an error.
> Now, I see your original commit 'c2794437091a4fda72c4a4f3567dd728dcc0c3c9'
> and find below message.
>
> "Platforms which need early i/o mapping (e.g. for vga console) can call
> pci_map_io_early in their .map_io function."
>
> Therfore, for some platform, it is possible that there is a mapping within
> PCI reserved range.
>
> So, I will not add WARN here.
>
> I will fix and re-send v6 with your ACK.
>
> Thanks for review.
>
> > >>>
> > >>> The replacement code should be better. However I'd like you to get an
> > >>> ACK from Rob Herring as well for this patch.
> > >>
> > >> It doesn't appear to me the above case is handled. The virt addr is
> > >> checked whether it is within an existing mapping, but not whether the
> > >> new mapping would overlap an existing mapping. It would be good to check
> > >> for this generically rather than specifically for the PCI i/o mapping.
> > >
> > > Agreed. However that is checked already in vm_area_add_early().
> > > Therefore the overlap test here is redundant.
> >
> > Ah, right. In that case:
> >
> > Acked-by: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>
> >
> > Rob
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-06 5:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-05 0:31 [PATCH v5 0/3] introduce static_vm for ARM-specific static mapped area Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-05 0:31 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-05 0:31 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] ARM: vmregion: remove vmregion code entirely Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-05 0:31 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-05 8:52 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-05 8:52 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-06 2:08 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-06 2:08 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-05 0:31 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] ARM: ioremap: introduce an infrastructure for static mapped area Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-05 0:31 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-05 4:08 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-05 4:08 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-05 0:31 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] ARM: mm: use static_vm for managing static mapped areas Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-05 0:31 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-05 4:44 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-05 4:44 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-05 17:28 ` Rob Herring
2013-02-05 17:28 ` Rob Herring
2013-02-05 18:13 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-05 18:13 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-05 19:12 ` Rob Herring
2013-02-05 19:12 ` Rob Herring
2013-02-06 2:07 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-06 2:07 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-06 5:05 ` Joonsoo Kim [this message]
2013-02-06 5:05 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-06 6:19 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-06 6:19 ` Nicolas Pitre
2013-02-06 1:41 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-06 1:41 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-05 9:02 ` [PATCH v5 0/3] introduce static_vm for ARM-specific static mapped area Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-05 9:02 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2013-02-06 2:09 ` Joonsoo Kim
2013-02-06 2:09 ` Joonsoo Kim
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20130206050527.GA8249@lge.com \
--to=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.