From: Laura Abbott <lauraa@codeaurora.org>
To: Steve Capper <steve.capper@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: "zhichang.yuan" <zhichang.yuan@linaro.org>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@linaro.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Some questions about DEBUG_PAGEALLOC on ARMv8
Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 10:14:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <540DE3E3.8090700@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140908105530.GB4866@e103986-lin>
On 9/8/2014 3:55 AM, Steve Capper wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 04, 2014 at 10:41:52AM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> Hi Zhichang,
>>
>> (cc'ing Steve Capper for the huge page stuff)
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 01:38:26PM +0100, zhichang.yuan wrote:
>>> I am working to implement the DEBUG_PAGEALLOC on ARMv8.
>>
>> I assume that's the arm64 kernel.
>>
>>> After i investigated the DEBUG_PAGEALLOC implementation on x86 arch,
>>> some questions are standing in the way to start coding.
>>>
>>> 1. How to handle the large page when DEBUG_PAGEALLOC is enabled In
>>> ARMv8, the kernel direct memory page table entries will set the block
>>> flag for better performance. When DEBUG_PAGEALLOC is configured, if
>>> the size of freed page is not multiply of page block size, there is no
>>> corresponding page table entry. In the old x86 kernel version, the
>>> large page to be freed will be split into normal page size and build
>>> the corresponding PTEs. And afterwards, someone done a patch to remove
>>> the splitting process. It will make the code simpler and easily
>>> stable.
>>
>> Initially, you could either map everything as pages or implement
>> splitting of huge pages (if for example the huge page is at the pmd
>> level, you allocate and populate a pte).
>>
>>> I prefer the current design in x86, what are your thoughts here?
>>
>> I haven't looked at it yet.
>>
>>> 2. Does ARMv8 support HIBERNATION?
>>
>> Not yet.
>>
>>> The HIBERNATION has some dependency on DEBUG_PAGEALLOC.
>>
>> Like in DEBUG_PAGEALLOC "depends on !HIBERNATION"?
>>
>>> 3. Is the hypothesis of DEBUG_PAGEALLOC always true?
>>
>> Which hypothesis?
>>
>>> From the x86 code, DEBUG_PAGEALLOC use the invalid page table entries
>>> to catch the accesses to free pages. This mechanism is based on the
>>> hypothesis that all the corresponding page table entries that are
>>> corresponding to the free pages are cleared correctly. Supposed this
>>> condition is always true, what we need to do is just to clear the
>>> kernel linear mapping page entries, since those page tables are
>>> fixable after initialization. DEBUG_PAGEALLOC on x86 seems to do like
>>> that.
>>
>> I guess that's the ARCH_SUPPORTS_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC rather than just the
>> simple DEBUG_PAGEALLOC which can be enabled on arm64 as well, you just
>> get page poisoning rather than invalid mappings.
>>
>> It could be done on arm64 as well but you need to sort out huge page
>> splitting or just map everything as pages when the option is enabled.
>>
>
> (cc'ing Laura Abbott for info...)
>
> Hi,
> There is support for splitting pmd's and pud's in the direct kernel
> mapping in the following series from Laura Abbott:
>
> "[PATCHv3 7/7] arm64: add better page protections to arm64"
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-August/280782.html
>
> Perhaps some of the splitting logic there could be used by the
> kernel_map_pages arm64 implementation for ARCH_SUPPORTS_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC?
>
> Cheers,
>
The page splitting was originally written for a out of tree implementation
of something similar to ARCH_SUPPORTS_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC for both arm and
arm64 so yes it could be used. The approach taken was
- map all memory with sections initially
- walk all memblock and remap as 4K pages
There is a performance hit involved but for some issues the benefits certainly
outweigh the costs (One person described it as 'the best feature since
CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG').
If there is interest, I can clean up the patches and submit them as a proof
of concept. The approach probably won't cover 64K/THP but it might be a
starting point.
Thanks,
Laura
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-08 17:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-22 12:38 Some questions about DEBUG_PAGEALLOC on ARMv8 zhichang.yuan
2014-09-04 9:41 ` Catalin Marinas
2014-09-08 10:55 ` Steve Capper
2014-09-08 17:14 ` Laura Abbott [this message]
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=540DE3E3.8090700@codeaurora.org \
--to=lauraa@codeaurora.org \
--cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dsaxena@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=steve.capper@arm.com \
--cc=zhichang.yuan@linaro.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).