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=-5.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,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 8656AC04EB8 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 17:16:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (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 C9EF920672 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 17:16:03 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C9EF920672 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 438T694dvvzDqX7 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 04:16:01 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.158.5; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=rppt@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 438T3n53PLzDqX0 for ; Wed, 5 Dec 2018 04:13:57 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id wB4H90VR058778 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 12:13:46 -0500 Received: from e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.99]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2p5ue206my-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Tue, 04 Dec 2018 12:13:45 -0500 Received: from localhost by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 17:13:41 -0000 Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.194) by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.133) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256) Tue, 4 Dec 2018 17:13:33 -0000 Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.59]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id wB4HDWpW54395098 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 4 Dec 2018 17:13:32 GMT Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F1D1A4051; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 17:13:32 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CB2EA404D; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 17:13:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rapoport-lnx (unknown [9.148.206.196]) by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Tue, 4 Dec 2018 17:13:29 +0000 (GMT) Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2018 19:13:28 +0200 From: Mike Rapoport To: Michael Ellerman Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] powerpc: prefer memblock APIs returning virtual address References: <1543852035-26634-1-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com> <1543852035-26634-2-git-send-email-rppt@linux.ibm.com> <87woophasy.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87woophasy.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 x-cbid: 18120417-0012-0000-0000-000002D481B4 X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused x-cbparentid: 18120417-0013-0000-0000-00002109DF5B Message-Id: <20181204171327.GL26700@rapoport-lnx> X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2018-12-04_07:, , signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1812040146 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Michal Hocko , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Rich Felker , Paul Mackerras , sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Chen , Jonas Bonn , linux-c6x-dev@linux-c6x.org, Yoshinori Sato , Russell King , Mark Salter , Arnd Bergmann , Stefan Kristiansson , openrisc@lists.librecores.org, Greentime Hu , Stafford Horne , Guan Xuetao , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Michal Simek , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S. Miller" Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Tue, Dec 04, 2018 at 08:59:41PM +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Hi Mike, > > Thanks for trying to clean these up. > > I think a few could be improved though ... > > Mike Rapoport writes: > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c > > index 913bfca..fa884ad 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/paca.c > > @@ -42,17 +42,15 @@ static void *__init alloc_paca_data(unsigned long size, unsigned long align, > > nid = early_cpu_to_node(cpu); > > } > > > > - pa = memblock_alloc_base_nid(size, align, limit, nid, MEMBLOCK_NONE); > > - if (!pa) { > > - pa = memblock_alloc_base(size, align, limit); > > - if (!pa) > > - panic("cannot allocate paca data"); > > - } > > + ptr = memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw(size, align, MEMBLOCK_LOW_LIMIT, > > + limit, nid); > > + if (!ptr) > > + panic("cannot allocate paca data"); > > The old code doesn't zero, but two of the three callers of > alloc_paca_data() *do* zero the whole allocation, so I'd be happy if we > did it in here instead. I looked at the callers and couldn't tell if zeroing memory in init_lppaca() would be ok. I'll remove the _raw here. > That would mean we could use memblock_alloc_try_nid() avoiding the need > to panic() manually. Actual, my plan was to remove panic() from all memblock_alloc* and make all callers to check the returned value. I believe it's cleaner and also allows more meaningful panic messages. Not mentioning the reduction of memblock code. > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c > > index 236c115..d11ee7f 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/setup_64.c > > @@ -634,19 +634,17 @@ __init u64 ppc64_bolted_size(void) > > > > static void *__init alloc_stack(unsigned long limit, int cpu) > > { > > - unsigned long pa; > > + void *ptr; > > > > BUILD_BUG_ON(STACK_INT_FRAME_SIZE % 16); > > > > - pa = memblock_alloc_base_nid(THREAD_SIZE, THREAD_SIZE, limit, > > - early_cpu_to_node(cpu), MEMBLOCK_NONE); > > - if (!pa) { > > - pa = memblock_alloc_base(THREAD_SIZE, THREAD_SIZE, limit); > > - if (!pa) > > - panic("cannot allocate stacks"); > > - } > > + ptr = memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw(THREAD_SIZE, THREAD_SIZE, > > + MEMBLOCK_LOW_LIMIT, limit, > > + early_cpu_to_node(cpu)); > > + if (!ptr) > > + panic("cannot allocate stacks"); > > Similarly here, several of the callers zero the stack, and I'd rather > all of them did. > > So again we could use memblock_alloc_try_nid() here and remove the > memset()s from emergency_stack_init(). Ok > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable-radix.c b/arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable-radix.c > > index 9311560..415a1eb0 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable-radix.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/mm/pgtable-radix.c > > @@ -51,24 +51,18 @@ static int native_register_process_table(unsigned long base, unsigned long pg_sz > > static __ref void *early_alloc_pgtable(unsigned long size, int nid, > > unsigned long region_start, unsigned long region_end) > > { > > - unsigned long pa = 0; > > + phys_addr_t min_addr = MEMBLOCK_LOW_LIMIT; > > + phys_addr_t max_addr = MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ANYWHERE; > > void *pt; > > > > - if (region_start || region_end) /* has region hint */ > > - pa = memblock_alloc_range(size, size, region_start, region_end, > > - MEMBLOCK_NONE); > > - else if (nid != -1) /* has node hint */ > > - pa = memblock_alloc_base_nid(size, size, > > - MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ANYWHERE, > > - nid, MEMBLOCK_NONE); > > + if (region_start) > > + min_addr = region_start; > > + if (region_end) > > + max_addr = region_end; > > > > - if (!pa) > > - pa = memblock_alloc_base(size, size, MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ANYWHERE); > > - > > - BUG_ON(!pa); > > - > > - pt = __va(pa); > > - memset(pt, 0, size); > > + pt = memblock_alloc_try_nid_nopanic(size, size, min_addr, max_addr, > > + nid); > > + BUG_ON(!pt); > > I don't think there's any reason to BUG_ON() here rather than letting > memblock() call panic() for us. So this could also be memblock_alloc_try_nid(). I'd prefer to panic here. > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pasemi/iommu.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pasemi/iommu.c > > index f297152..f62930f 100644 > > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pasemi/iommu.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pasemi/iommu.c > > @@ -208,7 +208,9 @@ static int __init iob_init(struct device_node *dn) > > pr_debug(" -> %s\n", __func__); > > > > /* For 2G space, 8x64 pages (2^21 bytes) is max total l2 size */ > > - iob_l2_base = (u32 *)__va(memblock_alloc_base(1UL<<21, 1UL<<21, 0x80000000)); > > + iob_l2_base = memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw(1UL << 21, 1UL << 21, > > + MEMBLOCK_LOW_LIMIT, 0x80000000, > > + NUMA_NO_NODE); > > This isn't equivalent is it? > > memblock_alloc_base() panics on failure but memblock_alloc_try_nid_raw() > doesn't? Right, this should be either a memblock function that panic()'s or a call to panic() if the returned value is NULL. My preference is for the second variant :) > Same comment for the other locations that do that conversion. > > cheers > -- Sincerely yours, Mike.