public inbox for linux-mm@kvack.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Swaraj Gaikwad <swarajgaikwad1925@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	"open list:MEMBLOCK AND MEMORY MANAGEMENT INITIALIZATION"
	<linux-mm@kvack.org>, open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	skhan@linuxfoundation.org, david.hunter.linux@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] mm/memblock: Fix reserve_mem allocation overlapping KHO scratch regions
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2025 17:03:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aSxcs-jCnkrm8o0M@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251130172939.574999-1-swarajgaikwad1925@gmail.com>

Hi,

On Sun, Nov 30, 2025 at 05:29:39PM +0000, Swaraj Gaikwad wrote:
> Currently, `reserve_mem=` does not check for overlap with these KHO
> scratch areas. As a result, a memblock allocation may land inside a
> KHO-provided scratch region, leading to corruption or loss of the data.
> Noted by the following TODO:
>   /* TODO: Allocation must be outside of scratch region */
> This RFC proposes extending `reserve_mem()` to allocate memory *only* in
> gaps outside the KHO scratch intervals. The logic is:
> 
>   1. Walk through all KHO scratch ranges (kho_scratch[]).
>   2. Attempt allocation in each safe gap:
>         [curr_start_addr, scratch_start)
>   3. If not found, attempt to allocate after the last scratch block.
>   4. If all attempts fail, return -ENOMEM.
> 
> The allocation is done via `memblock_phys_alloc_range()`, which already
> supports constrained range allocation and preserves alignment guarantees.
> 
> This is posted as an RFC because I would like feedback on:
> 
>   - Whether the allocation-gap scanning approach is acceptable.
>   - Whether this logic belongs in reserve_mem() or should be abstracted
>     into a helper for reuse.
>   - I would appreciate guidance on testing this change.

So this is completely untested? 

Kernel documentation asks for submitters to test their code:
https://docs.kernel.org/process/submit-checklist.html#test-your-code

Please study the code you are changing to understand how it should be
tested and don't submit untested patches.
 
> Signed-off-by: Swaraj Gaikwad <swarajgaikwad1925@gmail.com>

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.


  reply	other threads:[~2025-11-30 15:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-11-30 17:29 [PATCH RFC] mm/memblock: Fix reserve_mem allocation overlapping KHO scratch regions Swaraj Gaikwad
2025-11-30 15:03 ` Mike Rapoport [this message]
2025-11-30 21:15   ` Swaraj Gaikwad
2025-12-01  6:50     ` Mike Rapoport

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=aSxcs-jCnkrm8o0M@kernel.org \
    --to=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david.hunter.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=swarajgaikwad1925@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox