From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>,
Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 2/2] memory-device: rewrite address assignment using ranges
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2018 13:35:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0ba15f35-4827-f6f9-7a62-94a13027c727@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181213132850.2b79d12f@redhat.com>
On 13.12.18 13:28, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018 10:28:21 +0100
> David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Let's rewrite it properly using ranges. This fixes certain overflows that
>> are right now possible. E.g.
>>
>> qemu-system-x86_64 -m 4G,slots=20,maxmem=40G -M pc \
>> -object memory-backend-file,id=mem1,share,mem-path=/dev/zero,size=2G
>> -device pc-dimm,memdev=mem1,id=dimm1,addr=-0x40000000
>>
>> Now properly errors out instead of succeeding. (Note that qapi
>> parsing of huge uint64_t values is broken and fixes are on the way)
>>
>> "can't add memory device [0xffffffffa0000000:0x80000000], usable range for
>> memory devices [0x140000000:0xe00000000]"
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
>> ---
>> hw/mem/memory-device.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>> 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/hw/mem/memory-device.c b/hw/mem/memory-device.c
>> index 8be63c8032..28e871f562 100644
>> --- a/hw/mem/memory-device.c
>> +++ b/hw/mem/memory-device.c
>> @@ -100,9 +100,8 @@ static uint64_t memory_device_get_free_addr(MachineState *ms,
>> uint64_t align, uint64_t size,
>> Error **errp)
>> {
>> - uint64_t address_space_start, address_space_end;
>> GSList *list = NULL, *item;
>> - uint64_t new_addr = 0;
>> + Range as, new = range_empty;
>>
>> if (!ms->device_memory) {
>> error_setg(errp, "memory devices (e.g. for memory hotplug) are not "
>> @@ -115,13 +114,11 @@ static uint64_t memory_device_get_free_addr(MachineState *ms,
>> "enabled, please specify the maxmem option");
>> return 0;
>> }
>> - address_space_start = ms->device_memory->base;
>> - address_space_end = address_space_start +
>> - memory_region_size(&ms->device_memory->mr);
>> - g_assert(address_space_end >= address_space_start);
>> + range_init_nofail(&as, ms->device_memory->base,
>> + memory_region_size(&ms->device_memory->mr));
>>
>> - /* address_space_start indicates the maximum alignment we expect */
>> - if (!QEMU_IS_ALIGNED(address_space_start, align)) {
>> + /* start of address space indicates the maximum alignment we expect */
>> + if (!QEMU_IS_ALIGNED(range_lob(&as), align)) {
>> error_setg(errp, "the alignment (0x%" PRIx64 ") is not supported",
>> align);
>> return 0;
>> @@ -145,20 +142,25 @@ static uint64_t memory_device_get_free_addr(MachineState *ms,
>> }
>>
>> if (hint) {
>> - new_addr = *hint;
>> - if (new_addr < address_space_start) {
>> + if (range_init(&new, *hint, size)) {
>> error_setg(errp, "can't add memory device [0x%" PRIx64 ":0x%" PRIx64
>> - "] before 0x%" PRIx64, new_addr, size,
>> - address_space_start);
>> + "], usable range for memory devices [0x%" PRIx64 ":0x%"
>> + PRIx64 "]", *hint, size, range_lob(&as),
>> + range_size(&as));
> this changes error message to be the same as the next one and looses 'before' meaning
> so if you'd like to have the same error message, then prbably merging both branches would be better.
I can do that, but I'll have to refer to "*hint" and "size" then instead
of range_lob(&new) and range_size(&new), because the range might not be
initialized.
>
>> return 0;
>> - } else if ((new_addr + size) > address_space_end) {
>> + }
>> + if (!range_contains_range(&as, &new)) {
>> error_setg(errp, "can't add memory device [0x%" PRIx64 ":0x%" PRIx64
>> - "] beyond 0x%" PRIx64, new_addr, size,
>> - address_space_end);
>> + "], usable range for memory devices [0x%" PRIx64 ":0x%"
>> + PRIx64 "]", range_lob(&new), range_size(&new),
>> + range_lob(&as), range_size(&as));
>> return 0;
>> }
>> } else {
>> - new_addr = address_space_start;
>> + if (range_init(&new, range_lob(&as), size)) {
>> + error_setg(errp, "can't add memory device, device too big");
>> + return 0;
>> + }
>> }
>>
>> /* find address range that will fit new memory device */
>> @@ -166,30 +168,36 @@ static uint64_t memory_device_get_free_addr(MachineState *ms,
>> for (item = list; item; item = g_slist_next(item)) {
>> const MemoryDeviceState *md = item->data;
>> const MemoryDeviceClass *mdc = MEMORY_DEVICE_GET_CLASS(OBJECT(md));
>> - uint64_t md_size, md_addr;
>> + uint64_t next_addr;
>> + Range tmp;
>>
>> - md_addr = mdc->get_addr(md);
>> - md_size = memory_device_get_region_size(md, &error_abort);
>> + range_init_nofail(&tmp, mdc->get_addr(md),
>> + memory_device_get_region_size(md, &error_abort));
> is it possible to make QEMU abort here during hotplug here? (range_init_nofail)
No, as we've handled (and effectively assigned the addresses of) these
devices when they were effectively added/cold/hotplugged. We only have
to be careful with the new device we're adding.
>
>>
>> - if (ranges_overlap(md_addr, md_size, new_addr, size)) {
>> + if (range_overlaps_range(&tmp, &new)) {
>> if (hint) {
>> const DeviceState *d = DEVICE(md);
>> error_setg(errp, "address range conflicts with memory device"
>> " id='%s'", d->id ? d->id : "(unnamed)");
>> goto out;
>> }
>> - new_addr = QEMU_ALIGN_UP(md_addr + md_size, align);
>> +
>> + next_addr = QEMU_ALIGN_UP(range_upb(&tmp) + 1, align);
>> + if (!next_addr || range_init(&new, next_addr, range_size(&new))) {
>> + range_make_empty(&new);
>> + break;
>> + }
>> }
>> }
>>
>> - if (new_addr + size > address_space_end) {
>> + if (!range_contains_range(&as, &new)) {
>> error_setg(errp, "could not find position in guest address space for "
>> "memory device - memory fragmented due to alignments");
> it could happen due to fragmentation but also in case remaining free space is no enough
That should be handled via memory_device_check_addable(), which is
called at the beginning of the function. It checks for general size
availability.
Thanks!
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-13 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-12 9:28 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 0/2] qapi/range/memory-device: fixes and cleanups David Hildenbrand
2018-12-12 9:28 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 1/2] range: add some more functions David Hildenbrand
2018-12-12 9:28 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v4 2/2] memory-device: rewrite address assignment using ranges David Hildenbrand
2018-12-13 12:28 ` Igor Mammedov
2018-12-13 12:35 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2018-12-13 14:48 ` Igor Mammedov
2018-12-13 14:54 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-12-13 14:59 ` Igor Mammedov
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=0ba15f35-4827-f6f9-7a62-94a13027c727@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.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).