From: Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>
To: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"David Hildenbrand (Arm)" <david@kernel.org>,
Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Jinjiang Tu <tujinjiang@huawei.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] arm64: mm: Fix rodata=full block mapping support for realm guests
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2026 17:52:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <71261065-7895-492f-8457-998901391530@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260323130317.1737522-2-ryan.roberts@arm.com>
On 23/03/2026 14:03, Ryan Roberts wrote:
> [...]
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> index 96711b8578fd0..b9b248d24fd10 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> @@ -350,7 +350,6 @@ void __init arch_mm_preinit(void)
> }
>
> swiotlb_init(swiotlb, flags);
> - swiotlb_update_mem_attributes();
>
> /*
> * Check boundaries twice: Some fundamental inconsistencies can be
> @@ -377,6 +376,14 @@ void __init arch_mm_preinit(void)
> }
> }
>
> +bool page_alloc_available __ro_after_init;
> +
> +void __init mem_init(void)
> +{
> + page_alloc_available = true;
> + swiotlb_update_mem_attributes();
The move seems reasonable, x86 calls this function even later (from
arch_cpu_finalize_init()).
> +}
> +
> void free_initmem(void)
> {
> void *lm_init_begin = lm_alias(__init_begin);
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> index a6a00accf4f93..5b6a8d53e64b7 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> @@ -773,14 +773,33 @@ int split_kernel_leaf_mapping(unsigned long start, unsigned long end)
> {
> int ret;
>
> - /*
> - * !BBML2_NOABORT systems should not be trying to change permissions on
> - * anything that is not pte-mapped in the first place. Just return early
> - * and let the permission change code raise a warning if not already
> - * pte-mapped.
> - */
> - if (!system_supports_bbml2_noabort())
> - return 0;
> + if (!system_supports_bbml2_noabort()) {
> + /*
> + * !BBML2_NOABORT systems should not be trying to change
> + * permissions on anything that is not pte-mapped in the first
> + * place. Just return early and let the permission change code
> + * raise a warning if not already pte-mapped.
> + */
> + if (system_capabilities_finalized() ||
> + !cpu_supports_bbml2_noabort())
> + return 0;
> +
> + /*
> + * Boot-time: split_kernel_leaf_mapping_locked() allocates from
> + * page allocator. Can't split until it's available.
> + */
> + extern bool page_alloc_available;
Could we at least have the declaration in say <asm/mmu.h>? x86 defines a
similar global so we could eventually have a generic global (defined
before mem_init() is called).
Looks good otherwise:
Reviewed-by: Kevin Brodsky <kevin.brodsky@arm.com>
> + if (WARN_ON(!page_alloc_available))
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
> + /*
> + * Boot-time: Started secondary cpus but don't know if they
> + * support BBML2_NOABORT yet. Can't allow splitting in this
> + * window in case they don't.
> + */
> + if (WARN_ON(num_online_cpus() > 1))
> + return -EBUSY;
> + }
>
> /*
> * If the region is within a pte-mapped area, there is no need to try to
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-23 16:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20260323130317.1737522-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com>
2026-03-23 13:03 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] arm64: mm: Fix rodata=full block mapping support for realm guests Ryan Roberts
2026-03-23 16:52 ` Kevin Brodsky [this message]
2026-03-23 17:20 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-03-23 21:34 ` Yang Shi
2026-03-25 17:29 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-03-23 13:03 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] arm64: mm: Handle invalid large leaf mappings correctly Ryan Roberts
2026-03-23 16:52 ` Kevin Brodsky
2026-03-23 17:25 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-03-23 19:56 ` Kevin Brodsky
2026-03-24 2:30 ` Jinjiang Tu
2026-03-25 17:31 ` Ryan Roberts
2026-03-26 1:54 ` Jinjiang Tu
2026-03-24 18:20 ` Yang Shi
2026-03-25 17:37 ` Ryan Roberts
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=71261065-7895-492f-8457-998901391530@arm.com \
--to=kevin.brodsky@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=tujinjiang@huawei.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=yang@os.amperecomputing.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