From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64E05C04AB4 for ; Thu, 16 May 2019 10:57:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37EC92087B for ; Thu, 16 May 2019 10:57:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="gEsONFQT" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 37EC92087B Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=VoSXdXmZY0qOcPGDy7y0ZuxheJjgBMple76IeW110Z4=; b=gEsONFQTd6HqU6 Q7enNeNvZSiGC4rU1GX2v7rtXAO6683cC00n9eRJ8CvJPtsFMUdi9Y17tenzc9Bs5ydTdY011yZC3 nMGPoLiczYrEU2JluZLX80dglk9dQ6axIBDkYd9Uln1JZNh3rcWpA6pm94F46QFS6TmCBQ48YUwhR jYsi8AUOORV3D96MhP1rT6SjZOL4sqlFKlP7NLcDgSzbP2KQr4PjYXrhg9Y9ggGxvL/A0dUSvsbNK ePae5dMb/53ToFA/7YC4cu4laj5MATqvB6xRZRvtn5ir4jzHCzXeAkiVayAm6pZCxyqiX5EdUVXNp 9VctNmUqxx3glZwWmEcw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hRE5D-0008V8-Cs; Thu, 16 May 2019 10:57:55 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hRE55-0008UL-9j for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 16 May 2019 10:57:54 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFAE519BF; Thu, 16 May 2019 03:57:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lakrids.cambridge.arm.com (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB31F3F703; Thu, 16 May 2019 03:57:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 May 2019 11:57:41 +0100 From: Mark Rutland To: Anshuman Khandual Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 4/4] arm64/mm: Enable memory hot remove Message-ID: <20190516105741.GC40960@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1557824407-19092-1-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <1557824407-19092-5-git-send-email-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20190515114911.GC23983@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com> <499ebd4b-c905-dd99-3fc7-66050d89dc35@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <499ebd4b-c905-dd99-3fc7-66050d89dc35@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1+11 (2f07cb52) (2018-12-01) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190516_035747_351793_A4675846 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 26.12 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: cai@lca.pw, mhocko@suse.com, ira.weiny@intel.com, david@redhat.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, logang@deltatee.com, james.morse@arm.com, cpandya@codeaurora.org, arunks@codeaurora.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, osalvador@suse.de, mgorman@techsingularity.net, dan.j.williams@intel.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, robin.murphy@arm.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 11:04:48AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 05/15/2019 05:19 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: > > On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 02:30:07PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > >> Memory removal from an arch perspective involves tearing down two different > >> kernel based mappings i.e vmemmap and linear while releasing related page > >> table and any mapped pages allocated for given physical memory range to be > >> removed. > >> > >> Define a common kernel page table tear down helper remove_pagetable() which > >> can be used to unmap given kernel virtual address range. In effect it can > >> tear down both vmemap or kernel linear mappings. This new helper is called > >> from both vmemamp_free() and ___remove_pgd_mapping() during memory removal. > >> > >> For linear mapping there are no actual allocated pages which are mapped to > >> create the translation. Any pfn on a given entry is derived from physical > >> address (__va(PA) --> PA) whose linear translation is to be created. They > >> need not be freed as they were never allocated in the first place. But for > >> vmemmap which is a real virtual mapping (like vmalloc) physical pages are > >> allocated either from buddy or memblock which get mapped in the kernel page > >> table. These allocated and mapped pages need to be freed during translation > >> tear down. But page table pages need to be freed in both these cases. > > > > As previously discussed, we should only hot-remove memory which was > > hot-added, so we shouldn't encounter memory allocated from memblock. > > Right, not applicable any more. Will drop this word. > > >> These mappings need to be differentiated while deciding if a mapped page at > >> any level i.e [pte|pmd|pud]_page() should be freed or not. Callers for the > >> mapping tear down process should pass on 'sparse_vmap' variable identifying > >> kernel vmemmap mappings. > > > > I think that you can simplify the paragraphs above down to: > > > > The arch code for hot-remove must tear down portions of the linear map > > and vmemmap corresponding to memory being removed. In both cases the > > page tables mapping these regions must be freed, and when sparse > > vmemmap is in use the memory backing the vmemmap must also be freed. > > > > This patch adds a new remove_pagetable() helper which can be used to > > tear down either region, and calls it from vmemmap_free() and > > ___remove_pgd_mapping(). The sparse_vmap argument determines whether > > the backing memory will be freed. > > The current one is bit more descriptive on detail. Anyways will replace with > the above writeup if that is preferred. I would prefer the suggested form above, as it's easier to extract the necessary details from it. [...] > >> +static void > >> +remove_pagetable(unsigned long start, unsigned long end, bool sparse_vmap) > >> +{ > >> + unsigned long addr, next; > >> + pud_t *pudp_base; > >> + pgd_t *pgdp; > >> + > >> + spin_lock(&init_mm.page_table_lock); > > > > It would be good to explain why we need to take the ptl here. > > Will update both commit message and add an in-code comment here. > > > > > IIUC that shouldn't be necessary for the linear map. Am I mistaken? > > Its not absolutely necessary for linear map right now because both memory hot > plug & ptdump which modifies or walks the page table ranges respectively take > memory hotplug lock. That apart, no other callers creates or destroys linear > mapping at runtime. > > > > > Is there a specific race when tearing down the vmemmap? > > This is trickier than linear map. vmemmap additions would be protected with > memory hotplug lock but this can potential collide with vmalloc/IO regions. > Even if they dont right now that will be because they dont share intermediate > page table levels. Sure; if we could just state something like: The vmemmap region may share levels of table with the vmalloc region. Take the ptl so that we can safely free potentially-sahred tables. ... I think that would be sufficient. Thanks, Mark. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel