All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@techadventures.net>
To: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
	david@redhat.com, yasu.isimatu@gmail.com, logang@deltatee.com,
	dave.jiang@intel.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] mm/memory_hotplug: Create __shrink_pages and move it to offline_pages
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2018 11:45:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180808094502.GA10068@techadventures.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180807151810.GB3301@redhat.com>

On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 11:18:10AM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> Correct, you should not call release_mem_region_adjustable() the device
> region is not part of regular iomem resource as it might not necessarily
> be enumerated through known ways to the kernel (ie only the device driver
> can discover the region and core kernel do not know about it).
> 
> One of the issue to adding this region to iomem resource is that they
> really need to be ignored by core kernel because you can not assume that
> CPU can actually access them. Moreover, if CPU can access them it is
> likely that CPU can not do atomic operation on them (ie what happens on
> a CPU atomic instruction is undefined). So they are _special_ and only
> make sense to be use in conjunction with a device driver.
> 
> 
> Also in the case they do exist in iomem resource it is as PCIE BAR so
> as IORESOURCE_IO (iirc) and thus release_mem_region_adjustable() would
> return -EINVAL. Thought nothing bad happens because of that, only a
> warning message that might confuse the user.

Just to see if I understand this correctly.
I guess that these regions are being registered via devm_request_mem_region() calls.
Among other callers, devm_request_mem_region() is being called from:

dax_pmem_probe
hmm_devmem_add

AFAICS from the code, those regions will inherit the flags from the parent, which is iomem_resource:

#define devm_request_mem_region(dev,start,n,name) \
	__devm_request_region(dev, &iomem_resource, (start), (n), (name))

struct resource iomem_resource = {
	.name	= "PCI mem",
	.start	= 0,
	.end	= -1,
	.flags	= IORESOURCE_MEM,
};


struct resource * __request_region()
{
	...
	...
	res->flags = resource_type(parent) | resource_ext_type(parent);
	res->flags |= IORESOURCE_BUSY | flags;
	res->desc = parent->desc;
	...
	...
}

So the regions will not be tagged as IORESOURCE_IO but IORESOURCE_MEM.
>From the first glance release_mem_region_adjustable() looks like it does
more things than __release_region(), and I did not check it deeply
but maybe we can make it work.

Thanks
-- 
Oscar Salvador
SUSE L3

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@techadventures.net>
To: Jerome Glisse <jglisse@redhat.com>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@kernel.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
	david@redhat.com, yasu.isimatu@gmail.com, logang@deltatee.com,
	dave.jiang@intel.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] mm/memory_hotplug: Create __shrink_pages and move it to offline_pages
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2018 11:45:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180808094502.GA10068@techadventures.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180807151810.GB3301@redhat.com>

On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 11:18:10AM -0400, Jerome Glisse wrote:
> Correct, you should not call release_mem_region_adjustable() the device
> region is not part of regular iomem resource as it might not necessarily
> be enumerated through known ways to the kernel (ie only the device driver
> can discover the region and core kernel do not know about it).
> 
> One of the issue to adding this region to iomem resource is that they
> really need to be ignored by core kernel because you can not assume that
> CPU can actually access them. Moreover, if CPU can access them it is
> likely that CPU can not do atomic operation on them (ie what happens on
> a CPU atomic instruction is undefined). So they are _special_ and only
> make sense to be use in conjunction with a device driver.
> 
> 
> Also in the case they do exist in iomem resource it is as PCIE BAR so
> as IORESOURCE_IO (iirc) and thus release_mem_region_adjustable() would
> return -EINVAL. Thought nothing bad happens because of that, only a
> warning message that might confuse the user.

Just to see if I understand this correctly.
I guess that these regions are being registered via devm_request_mem_region() calls.
Among other callers, devm_request_mem_region() is being called from:

dax_pmem_probe
hmm_devmem_add

AFAICS from the code, those regions will inherit the flags from the parent, which is iomem_resource:

#define devm_request_mem_region(dev,start,n,name) \
	__devm_request_region(dev, &iomem_resource, (start), (n), (name))

struct resource iomem_resource = {
	.name	= "PCI mem",
	.start	= 0,
	.end	= -1,
	.flags	= IORESOURCE_MEM,
};


struct resource * __request_region()
{
	...
	...
	res->flags = resource_type(parent) | resource_ext_type(parent);
	res->flags |= IORESOURCE_BUSY | flags;
	res->desc = parent->desc;
	...
	...
}

So the regions will not be tagged as IORESOURCE_IO but IORESOURCE_MEM.
From the first glance release_mem_region_adjustable() looks like it does
more things than __release_region(), and I did not check it deeply
but maybe we can make it work.

Thanks
-- 
Oscar Salvador
SUSE L3

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-08-08  9:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-07 13:37 [RFC PATCH 0/3] Do not touch pages in remove_memory path osalvador
2018-08-07 13:37 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] mm/memory_hotplug: Add nid parameter to arch_remove_memory osalvador
2018-08-07 13:37 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] mm/memory_hotplug: Create __shrink_pages and move it to offline_pages osalvador
2018-08-07 13:52   ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-07 13:52     ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-07 14:54     ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-07 14:54       ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-07 15:19       ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-07 15:19         ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-07 15:28         ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-07 15:28           ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-07 20:48       ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-07 22:13         ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-07 22:13           ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-08  7:38           ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-08  7:45             ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-08  7:56               ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-08  8:08                 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-08 13:42                   ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-08 17:55                     ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-08 17:55                       ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-08 21:29                       ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-09  7:50                         ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-09  7:52                           ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-08  7:51             ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-08  8:00               ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-07 14:59     ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-07 15:18       ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-07 15:18         ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-08  6:47         ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-08 16:58           ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-08 16:58             ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-08 21:28             ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-09  8:24             ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-09 14:27               ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-09 14:27                 ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-09 15:09                 ` Michal Hocko
2018-08-09 16:58                   ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-09 16:58                     ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-09 20:50                     ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-16 14:58                     ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-16 17:32                       ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-16 17:32                         ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-08  9:45         ` Oscar Salvador [this message]
2018-08-08  9:45           ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-08 17:33           ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-08 17:33             ` Jerome Glisse
2018-08-07 13:37 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] mm/memory_hotplug: Refactor shrink_zone/pgdat_span osalvador
2018-08-07 14:16 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] Do not touch pages in remove_memory path David Hildenbrand
2018-08-07 14:19   ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-07 14:20     ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-07 14:28       ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-07 14:41         ` David Hildenbrand
2018-08-07 14:52           ` Oscar Salvador
2018-08-15 14:05 ` Pavel Tatashin
2018-08-15 14:32   ` Oscar Salvador

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=20180808094502.GA10068@techadventures.net \
    --to=osalvador@techadventures.net \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
    --cc=david@redhat.com \
    --cc=jglisse@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=logang@deltatee.com \
    --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \
    --cc=osalvador@suse.de \
    --cc=yasu.isimatu@gmail.com \
    /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.