Re: [PATCH] arm64: Make the ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER config input prompt unconditional

From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc: Justin Forbes <jforbes@fedoraproject.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Make the ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER config input prompt unconditional
Date: Fri, 5 May 2023 15:47:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZFWHkytHycuiwydM@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMj1kXHzEaL7P8ko_Sw9wK72HLA5Wc3bH9PiBsgGJ3fPXi6Lrw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, May 06, 2023 at 12:08:33AM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> On Sat, 6 May 2023 at 00:01, Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, May 03, 2023 at 05:41:19PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > > On Wed, 3 May 2023 at 17:36, Justin Forbes <jforbes@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 7:33 AM Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Commit 34affcd7577a ("arm64: drop ranges in definition of
> > > > > ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER") dropped the ranges from the config entry and
> > > > > introduced an EXPERT condition on the input prompt instead. This change
> > > > > may affect some distro kernels that change ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER but do
> > > > > not want to enable EXPERT.
> > > > >
> > > > > Drop EXPERT from the input prompt together with the (ARM64_4K_PAGES ||
> > > > > ARM64_16K_PAGES) condition as the latter no longer makes sense after the
> > > > > ranges were removed. The latter makes all the page size configurations
> > > > > consistent w.r.t. ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER.
> > > > >
> > > > > Fixes: 34affcd7577a ("arm64: drop ranges in definition of ARCH_FORCE_MAX_ORDER")
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> > > > > Reported-by: Justin M. Forbes <jforbes@fedoraproject.org>
> > > > > Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> > > > > Cc: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
> > > > > Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> > > >
> > > > This works for me, thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Acked-by: Justin M. Forbes <jforbes@fedoraproject.org>
> > > >
> > >
> > > I'd still be interested in gaining a better understanding as to why
> > > Fedora/RHEL think they need to change this value on arm64. In
> > > particular, whether it is to support ThunderX, or whether there are
> > > any good reasons for doing so that we are unaware of.
> >
> > Yeah, there still was no explanation why Fedora/RHEL had to increase
> > MAX_ORDER in their configs.
> >
> > I'm surely missing something, but I also don't understand why ThunderX
> > would need physically contiguous allocations larger than 4M.
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/1430686172-18222-5-git-send-email-rric@kernel.org/

But does not the second patch in that series (now commit 30f2136346ca
("irqchip/gicv3-its: Add range check for number of allocated pages"))
ensures that allocation is not larger than 256 pages?

Or this is another allocation?

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel