From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Joerg Roedel <jroedel@suse.de>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@suse.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@techsingularity.net>,
marcelo.cerri@canonical.com, tim.gardner@canonical.com,
khalid.elmously@canonical.com, philip.cox@canonical.com,
aarcange@redhat.com, peterx@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev,
linux-efi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv9 03/14] mm/page_alloc: Fake unaccepted memory
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2023 15:39:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <835dfe65-d9dd-0b16-37d4-920e97f1bca0@suse.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230330114956.20342-4-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
On 3/30/23 13:49, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> For testing purposes, it is useful to fake unaccepted memory in the
> system. It helps to understand unaccepted memory overhead to the page
> allocator.
Ack on being useful for testing, but the question is if we want to also
merge this patch into mainline as it is?
> The patch allows to treat memory above the specified physical memory
> address as unaccepted.
>
> The change only fakes unaccepted memory for page allocator. Memblock is
> not affected.
>
> It also assumes that arch-provided accept_memory() on already accepted
> memory is a nop.
I guess to be in mainline it would have to at least gracefully handle the
case of accept_memory actually not being a nop, and running on a system with
actual unaccepted memory (probably by ignoring the parameter in such case).
Then also the parameter would have to be documented.
Speaking of documented parameters, I found at least two that seem a more
generic variant of this (but I didn't look closely if that makes sense):
efi_fake_mem= nn[KMG]@ss[KMG]:aa[,nn[KMG]@ss[KMG]:aa,..] [EFI; X86]
Add arbitrary attribute to specific memory range by
updating original EFI memory map.
memmap=<size>%<offset>-<oldtype>+<newtype>
[KNL,ACPI] Convert memory within the specified region
from <oldtype> to <newtype>. If "-<oldtype>" is left
Would any of those be usable for this usecase?
> Signed-off-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> mm/page_alloc.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/mm/page_alloc.c b/mm/page_alloc.c
> index d62fcb2f28bd..509a93b7e5af 100644
> --- a/mm/page_alloc.c
> +++ b/mm/page_alloc.c
> @@ -7213,6 +7213,8 @@ static DEFINE_STATIC_KEY_FALSE(zones_with_unaccepted_pages);
>
> static bool lazy_accept = true;
>
> +static unsigned long fake_unaccepted_start = -1UL;
> +
> static int __init accept_memory_parse(char *p)
> {
> if (!strcmp(p, "lazy")) {
> @@ -7227,11 +7229,30 @@ static int __init accept_memory_parse(char *p)
> }
> early_param("accept_memory", accept_memory_parse);
>
> +static int __init fake_unaccepted_start_parse(char *p)
> +{
> + if (!p)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + fake_unaccepted_start = memparse(p, &p);
> +
> + if (*p != '\0') {
> + fake_unaccepted_start = -1UL;
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +early_param("fake_unaccepted_start", fake_unaccepted_start_parse);
> +
> static bool page_contains_unaccepted(struct page *page, unsigned int order)
> {
> phys_addr_t start = page_to_phys(page);
> phys_addr_t end = start + (PAGE_SIZE << order);
>
> + if (start >= fake_unaccepted_start)
> + return true;
> +
> return range_contains_unaccepted_memory(start, end);
> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-03 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-30 11:49 [PATCHv9 00/14] mm, x86/cc: Implement support for unaccepted memory Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 01/14] x86/boot: Centralize __pa()/__va() definitions Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 02/14] mm: Add support for unaccepted memory Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-04-03 9:26 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-04-03 10:02 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-04-03 13:07 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 03/14] mm/page_alloc: Fake " Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-04-03 13:39 ` Vlastimil Babka [this message]
2023-04-03 14:39 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-04-03 15:50 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-04-14 10:19 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-04-03 14:43 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-04-03 14:47 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 04/14] mm/page_alloc: Add sysfs handle to accept accept_memory Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-04-03 13:43 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-04-03 14:41 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 05/14] efi/x86: Get full memory map in allocate_e820() Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 06/14] x86/boot: Add infrastructure required for unaccepted memory support Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 07/14] efi/x86: Implement support for unaccepted memory Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 08/14] x86/boot/compressed: Handle " Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 09/14] x86/mm: Reserve unaccepted memory bitmap Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 10/14] x86/mm: Provide helpers for unaccepted memory Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 11/14] x86/mm: Avoid load_unaligned_zeropad() stepping into " Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-04-03 13:28 ` Vlastimil Babka
2023-04-03 14:42 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 12/14] x86/tdx: Make _tdx_hypercall() and __tdx_module_call() available in boot stub Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 13/14] x86/tdx: Refactor try_accept_one() Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-03-30 11:49 ` [PATCHv9 14/14] x86/tdx: Add unaccepted memory support Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-04-03 14:42 ` [PATCHv9 00/14] mm, x86/cc: Implement support for unaccepted memory Vlastimil Babka
2023-04-16 19:19 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2023-04-17 7:37 ` Vlastimil Babka
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=835dfe65-d9dd-0b16-37d4-920e97f1bca0@suse.cz \
--to=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=aarcange@redhat.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dfaggioli@suse.com \
--cc=jroedel@suse.de \
--cc=khalid.elmously@canonical.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=marcelo.cerri@canonical.com \
--cc=mgorman@techsingularity.net \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=philip.cox@canonical.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=tim.gardner@canonical.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox