From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>,
scott@os.amperecomputing.com, cl@gentwo.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 5/6] arm64: mm: split linear mapping if BBML2 unsupported on secondary CPUs
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2025 16:25:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <11f84d00-8c76-402d-bbad-014a3542992f@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aLnFd1Hl_FSHZR3z@arm.com>
On 04/09/2025 17:59, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 12:52:46PM +0100, Ryan Roberts wrote:
>> The kernel linear mapping is painted in very early stage of system boot.
>> The cpufeature has not been finalized yet at this point. So the linear
>> mapping is determined by the capability of boot CPU only. If the boot
>> CPU supports BBML2, large block mappings will be used for linear
>> mapping.
>>
>> But the secondary CPUs may not support BBML2, so repaint the linear
>> mapping if large block mapping is used and the secondary CPUs don't
>> support BBML2 once cpufeature is finalized on all CPUs.
>>
>> If the boot CPU doesn't support BBML2 or the secondary CPUs have the
>> same BBML2 capability with the boot CPU, repainting the linear mapping
>> is not needed.
>>
>> Repainting is implemented by the boot CPU, which we know supports BBML2,
>> so it is safe for the live mapping size to change for this CPU. The
>> linear map region is walked using the pagewalk API and any discovered
>> large leaf mappings are split to pte mappings using the existing helper
>> functions. Since the repainting is performed inside of a stop_machine(),
>> we must use GFP_ATOMIC to allocate the extra intermediate pgtables. But
>> since we are still early in boot, it is expected that there is plenty of
>> memory available so we will never need to sleep for reclaim, and so
>> GFP_ATOMIC is acceptable here.
>>
>> The secondary CPUs are all put into a waiting area with the idmap in
>> TTBR0 and reserved map in TTBR1 while this is performed since they
>> cannot be allowed to observe any size changes on the live mappings. Some
>> of this infrastructure is reused from the kpti case. Specifically we
>> share the same flag (was __idmap_kpti_flag, now idmap_kpti_bbml2_flag)
>> since it means we don't have to reserve any extra pgtable memory to
>> idmap the extra flag.
>>
>> Co-developed-by: Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang@os.amperecomputing.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@arm.com>
>
> I think this works, so:
>
> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Thanks!
>
> However, I wonder how likely we are to find this combination in the
> field to be worth carrying this code upstream. With kpti, we were aware
> of platforms requiring it but is this also the case for BBM? If not, I'd
> keep the patch out until we get a concrete example.
Cortex-X4 supports BBML2_NOABORT (and is in the allow list). According to
Wikipedia [1], X4 is in:
- Google Tensor G4 [2]
- MediaTek Dimensity 9300/9300+ [3]
- Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 [4]
And in each of those SoCs, the X4s are paired with A720 and A520 cores.
To my knowledge, neither A720 nor A520 support BBML2_NOABORT. Certainly they are
not currently in the allow list. So on that basis, I think the require the
fallback path, assuming these platforms use one of the X4 cores as the boot CPU.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Cortex-X4
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Tensor
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_MediaTek_systems_on_chips
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Qualcomm_Snapdragon_systems_on_chips
Thanks,
Ryan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-08 15:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-08-29 11:52 [PATCH v7 0/6] arm64: support FEAT_BBM level 2 and large block mapping when rodata=full Ryan Roberts
2025-08-29 11:52 ` [PATCH v7 1/6] arm64: Enable permission change on arm64 kernel block mappings Ryan Roberts
2025-09-04 3:40 ` Jinjiang Tu
2025-09-04 11:06 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-04 11:49 ` Jinjiang Tu
2025-09-04 13:21 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-16 21:37 ` Yang Shi
2025-08-29 11:52 ` [PATCH v7 2/6] arm64: cpufeature: add AmpereOne to BBML2 allow list Ryan Roberts
2025-08-29 22:08 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-04 11:07 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-03 17:24 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-09-04 0:49 ` Yang Shi
2025-08-29 11:52 ` [PATCH v7 3/6] arm64: mm: support large block mapping when rodata=full Ryan Roberts
2025-09-03 19:15 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-09-04 0:52 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-04 11:09 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-04 11:15 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-04 14:57 ` Yang Shi
2025-08-29 11:52 ` [PATCH v7 4/6] arm64: mm: Optimize split_kernel_leaf_mapping() Ryan Roberts
2025-08-29 22:11 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-03 19:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-09-04 11:09 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-08-29 11:52 ` [PATCH v7 5/6] arm64: mm: split linear mapping if BBML2 unsupported on secondary CPUs Ryan Roberts
2025-09-04 16:59 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-09-04 17:54 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-08 15:25 ` Ryan Roberts [this message]
2025-08-29 11:52 ` [PATCH v7 6/6] arm64: mm: Optimize linear_map_split_to_ptes() Ryan Roberts
2025-08-29 22:27 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-04 11:10 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-04 14:58 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-04 17:00 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-09-01 5:04 ` [PATCH v7 0/6] arm64: support FEAT_BBM level 2 and large block mapping when rodata=full Dev Jain
2025-09-01 8:03 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-03 0:21 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-03 0:50 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-04 13:14 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-04 13:16 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-04 17:47 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-04 21:49 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-08 16:34 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-08 18:31 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-09 14:36 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-09 15:32 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-09 16:32 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-09 17:32 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-11 22:03 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-17 16:28 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-17 17:21 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-17 18:58 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-17 19:15 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-17 19:40 ` Ryan Roberts
2025-09-17 19:59 ` Yang Shi
2025-09-16 23:44 ` Yang Shi
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=11f84d00-8c76-402d-bbad-014a3542992f@arm.com \
--to=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=cl@gentwo.org \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=scott@os.amperecomputing.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