Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1208907
| From | Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" |
| Date | 2015-08-17 23:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <pYAs1-2QL-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (2 earlier) <pXuRI-5Qe-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <pXvb3-6cV-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <pXvkJ-6Dt-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <pXvNL-7b2-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <pXzeF-3OQ-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 07:11:27PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 02:52:15PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > >>> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 11:50:05PM -0400, Dan Williams wrote: > > [..] > >>> > What is the rational for not updating max_pfn, max_low_pfn, ... ? > >>> > > >>> > >>> The idea is that this memory is not meant to be available to the page > >>> allocator and should not count as new memory capacity. We're only > >>> hotplugging it to get struct page coverage. > >> > >> But this sounds bogus to me to rely on max_pfn to stay smaller than > >> first_dev_pfn. For instance you might plug a device that register > >> dev memory and then some regular memory might be hotplug, effectively > >> updating max_pfn to a value bigger than first_dev_pfn. > >> > > > > True. > > > >> Also i do not think that the buddy allocator use max_pfn or max_low_pfn > >> to consider page/zone for allocation or not. > > > > Yes, I took it out with no effects. I'll investigate further whether > > we should be touching those variables or not for this new usage. > > Although it does not offer perfect protection if device memory is at a > physically lower address than RAM, skipping the update of these > variables does seem to be what we want. For example /dev/mem would > fail to allow write access to persistent memory if it fails a > valid_phys_addr_range() check. Since /dev/mem does not know how to > write to PMEM in a reliably persistent way, it should not treat a > PMEM-pfn like RAM. So i attach is a patch that should keep ZONE_DEVICE out of consideration for the buddy allocator. You might also want to keep page reserved and not free inside the zone, you could replace the generic_online_page() using set_online_page_callback() while hotpluging device memory. Regarding /dev/mem i would not worry about highmem, as /dev/mem is already broken in respect to memory hole that might exist (at least that is my understanding). Alternatively if you really care about /dev/mem you could add an arch valid_phys_addr_range() that could check valid zone. Cheers, Jérôme
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2015-08-13 06:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@gmail.com> - 2015-08-14 23:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2015-08-15 00:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@gmail.com> - 2015-08-15 00:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2015-08-15 00:40 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2015-08-15 04:20 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@gmail.com> - 2015-08-17 23:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2015-08-18 02:50 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 19:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> - 2015-08-18 19:30 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Jerome Glisse <j.glisse@gmail.com> - 2015-08-18 21:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2015-08-15 11:10 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/7] x86, mm: ZONE_DEVICE for "device memory" Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2015-08-15 15:40 +0200
csiph-web