From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
To: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: "Aneesh Kumar K . V" <aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] VA allocator fixes
Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2017 16:16:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cc66ea81-fd9a-0bd5-8a8c-5abdc604200b@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171106100315.29720-1-npiggin@gmail.com>
On 11/06/2017 11:03 AM, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> Florian found a nasty corner case with the VA allocation logic
> for crossing from 128TB to 512TB limit on hash, and made a
> really superb report of the problem -- traces, reproducer recipes,
> analysis, etc. which already mostly solved it.
>
> The first patch in the series should solve Florian's particular
> case, the next 3 are other issues with addr_limit. The last
> patch is technically a cleanup but I think it's fairly important
> in terms of understanding the code and also enabling some BUG
> checks (when addr_limit == 0).
>
> I have not tested these exactly on Florian's test case, but
> some tests of my own behave better afterwards. Hopefully he has
> time to re-test. Some careful review would be welcome too.
I think I have applied the five patches you posted, but I still get a
brk value above 128 TiB:
# /lib64/ld64.so.1 ./a.out
initial brk value: 0x7fffde960000
probing at 0x80000001fffc
I assumed you wanted to reject those?
In either case, I recommend to tweak the VM layout, so that ld.so does
not land closely to to the 128 TiB limit, so that the brk failure or
returning of 48-bit addresses is avoided.
Thanks,
Florian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-06 15:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-06 10:03 [PATCH 0/5] VA allocator fixes Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:03 ` [PATCH 1/5] powerpc/64s/hash: Fix 128TB-512TB virtual address boundary case allocation Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:38 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-06 10:54 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 11:05 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-06 11:21 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-07 2:00 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-07 2:03 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:03 ` [PATCH 2/5] powerpc/64s/hash: Allow MAP_FIXED allocations to cross 128TB boundary Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:44 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-06 11:55 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-07 2:28 ` Michael Ellerman
2017-11-07 2:52 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:03 ` [PATCH 3/5] powerpc/64s/hash: Fix fork() with 512TB process address space Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:44 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-06 10:03 ` [PATCH 4/5] powerpc/64s/radix: Fix 128TB-512TB virtual address boundary case allocation Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 11:14 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2017-11-06 11:42 ` Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 10:03 ` [PATCH 5/5] powerpc/64s: mm_context.addr_limit is only used on hash Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-06 15:16 ` Florian Weimer [this message]
2017-11-07 0:06 ` [PATCH 0/5] VA allocator fixes Nicholas Piggin
2017-11-07 1:59 ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
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=cc66ea81-fd9a-0bd5-8a8c-5abdc604200b@redhat.com \
--to=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=npiggin@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).