From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Sumanth Korikkar <sumanthk@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-mm <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] mm/memory_hotplug: introduce MEM_PREPARE_ONLINE/MEM_FINISH_OFFLINE notifiers
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 16:16:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c7512dd7-5009-4230-a29e-ea13c2e3be3e@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231127082023.2079810-2-sumanthk@linux.ibm.com>
On 27.11.23 09:20, Sumanth Korikkar wrote:
> Introduce MEM_PREPARE_ONLINE/MEM_FINISH_OFFLINE memory notifiers to
> prepare the transition of memory to and from a physically accessible
> state. This enhancement is crucial for implementing the "memmap on
> memory" feature for s390 in a subsequent patch.
>
> Platforms such as x86 can support physical memory hotplug via ACPI. When
> there is physical memory hotplug, ACPI event leads to the memory
> addition with the following callchain:
> acpi_memory_device_add()
> -> acpi_memory_enable_device()
> -> __add_memory()
>
> After this, the hotplugged memory is physically accessible, and altmap
> support prepared, before the "memmap on memory" initialization in
> memory_block_online() is called.
>
> On s390, memory hotplug works in a different way. The available hotplug
> memory has to be defined upfront in the hypervisor, but it is made
> physically accessible only when the user sets it online via sysfs,
> currently in the MEM_GOING_ONLINE notifier. This is too late and "memmap
> on memory" initialization is performed before calling MEM_GOING_ONLINE
> notifier.
>
> During the memory hotplug addition phase, altmap support is prepared and
> during the memory onlining phase s390 requires memory to be physically
> accessible and then subsequently initiate the "memmap on memory"
> initialization process.
>
> The memory provider will handle new MEM_PREPARE_ONLINE /
> MEM_FINISH_OFFLINE notifications and make the memory accessible.
>
> The mhp_flag MHP_OFFLINE_INACCESSIBLE is introduced and is relevant when
> used along with MHP_MEMMAP_ON_MEMORY, because the altmap cannot be
> written (e.g., poisoned) when adding memory -- before it is set online.
> This allows for adding memory with an altmap that is not currently made
> available by a hypervisor. When onlining that memory, the hypervisor can
> be instructed to make that memory accessible via the new notifiers and
> the onlining phase will not require any memory allocations, which is
> helpful in low-memory situations.
>
> All architectures ignore unknown memory notifiers. Therefore, the
> introduction of these new notifiers does not result in any functional
> modifications across architectures.
>
> Suggested-by: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>
> Suggested-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sumanth Korikkar <sumanthk@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
[...]
> };
>
> /*
> diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> index 7a5fc89a8652..ac7cfc09502d 100644
> --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> @@ -1083,8 +1083,25 @@ void adjust_present_page_count(struct page *page, struct memory_group *group,
> group->present_kernel_pages += nr_pages;
> }
>
> +static void page_init_poison_with_resched(unsigned long start_pfn, unsigned long nr_pages)
> +{
> + const unsigned long end_pfn = start_pfn + nr_pages;
> + unsigned long pfn, cur_nr_pages;
> +
> + /* Poison struct pages because they are now uninitialized again. */
> + for (pfn = start_pfn; pfn < end_pfn; pfn += cur_nr_pages) {
> + cond_resched();
> +
> + /* Select all remaining pages up to the next section boundary */
> + cur_nr_pages =
> + min(end_pfn - pfn, SECTION_ALIGN_UP(pfn + 1) - pfn);
> + page_init_poison(pfn_to_page(pfn),
> + sizeof(struct page) * cur_nr_pages);
> + }
> +}
> +
> int mhp_init_memmap_on_memory(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages,
> - struct zone *zone)
> + struct zone *zone, bool mhp_off_inaccessible)
> {
> unsigned long end_pfn = pfn + nr_pages;
> int ret, i;
> @@ -1092,7 +1109,14 @@ int mhp_init_memmap_on_memory(unsigned long pfn, unsigned long nr_pages,
> ret = kasan_add_zero_shadow(__va(PFN_PHYS(pfn)), PFN_PHYS(nr_pages));
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> -
> + /*
> + * Memory block is accessible at this stage and hence poison the struct
> + * pages now. If the memory block is accessible during memory hotplug
> + * addition phase, then page poisining is already performed in
> + * sparse_add_section().
> + */
> + if (mhp_off_inaccessible)
> + page_init_poison_with_resched(pfn, nr_pages);
Can you elaborate why a simple page_init_poison() as for
sparse_add_section() is insufficient?
Apart from that looks good.
Ideally, we'd be updating altmap->inaccessible as we online/offline
memory. But then, we'd have to remember MHP_OFFLINE_INACCESSIBLE somehow
differently.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-27 15:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-27 8:20 [PATCH v3 0/5] implement "memmap on memory" feature on s390 Sumanth Korikkar
2023-11-27 8:20 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] mm/memory_hotplug: introduce MEM_PREPARE_ONLINE/MEM_FINISH_OFFLINE notifiers Sumanth Korikkar
2023-11-27 15:16 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2023-11-28 7:54 ` Sumanth Korikkar
2023-11-27 15:50 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-11-27 8:20 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] s390/mm: allocate vmemmap pages from self-contained memory range Sumanth Korikkar
2023-11-27 8:20 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] s390/sclp: remove unhandled memory notifier type Sumanth Korikkar
2023-11-27 15:02 ` David Hildenbrand
[not found] ` <20231127082023.2079810-5-sumanthk@linux.ibm.com>
2023-11-27 15:11 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] s390/mm: implement MEM_PREPARE_ONLINE/MEM_FINISH_OFFLINE notifiers David Hildenbrand
2023-11-27 16:12 ` Sumanth Korikkar
2023-11-27 16:58 ` David Hildenbrand
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=c7512dd7-5009-4230-a29e-ea13c2e3be3e@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=sumanthk@linux.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).