From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DF8AC433EF for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 11:06:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FEA261262 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 11:06:10 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 0FEA261262 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 90C39940007; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 07:06:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 895206B0071; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 07:06:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 70E5F940007; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 07:06:09 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0102.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.102]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DD1D6B006C for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 07:06:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin01.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0611E1842B02D for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 11:06:09 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 78774597258.01.BC1561F Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by imf27.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34D3070009CF for ; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 11:06:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EBBF6008E; Fri, 5 Nov 2021 11:06:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1636110366; bh=gJsm1IizLqHIU46nqJ2PCv1weO5m/+2Lhx/GTelVNiA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=uKknH7Xo3L4tFaDX1x10uGTlyVBD8Pp4ABE1Nd6UfR4udeBpijbZRzg2e/wl1LBDi oU7vKRK6ylEEkUbz6G2lXztI5Z56Z1/C/jWh2euo0IRIb3z9doWrztVJuejnH4XNmj wp4FYpWDS3vR91479Qi8qBmLwsxkXj7gfKB/NXKB3TxhGj432VRQBMAwsWVifm5OM2 lz8EeR9tRp8idUnHCk47LG7uL5nCfRzH7+qg4g+dUTx9rWnMVGRk57ujHNhiyIRqLI adN/QVDYKJsQ+S1aOJLIsJeEn+hkIu2Bhltdxbjdhm0TYWiCeTGdQgesPgunBPQ3ow zGCcD9kAFT/NQ== Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2021 13:05:58 +0200 From: Mike Rapoport To: Catalin Marinas Cc: Qian Cai , Will Deacon , Andrew Morton , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Track no early_pgtable_alloc() for kmemleak Message-ID: References: <20211104155623.11158-1-quic_qiancai@quicinc.com> <9bb6fe11-c10a-a373-9288-d44a5ba976fa@quicinc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 34D3070009CF X-Stat-Signature: 86wir8dt6ffprn646ncqsydygg8xddmr Authentication-Results: imf27.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.s=k20201202 header.b=uKknH7Xo; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=kernel.org; spf=pass (imf27.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@kernel.org designates 198.145.29.99 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@kernel.org X-HE-Tag: 1636110367-324958 X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, Nov 05, 2021 at 10:08:05AM +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote: > On Thu, Nov 04, 2021 at 01:57:03PM -0400, Qian Cai wrote: > > On 11/4/21 1:06 PM, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > > I think I'll be better to rename MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_KASAN to, say, > > > MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_NOKMEMLEAK and use that for both KASAN and page table cases. > > > > Okay, that would look a bit nicer. > > Or MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE_NOLEAKTRACE to match SLAB_NOLEAKTRACE and > also hint that it's accessible memory. Hmm, I think MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_NOLEAKTRACE is enough. Having a constant instead of end limit already implies there is no limit and when we update the API to use lower bits or a dedicated 'flags' we won't need to change the flag name as well. > > > But more generally, we are going to hit this again and again. > > > Couldn't we add a memblock allocation as a mean to get more memory to > > > kmemleak::mem_pool_alloc()? > > > > For the last 5 years, this is the second time I am ware of this kind of > > issue just because of the 64KB->4KB switch on those servers, although I > > agree it could happen again in the future due to some new debugging > > features etc. I don't feel a strong need to rewrite it now though. Not > > sure if Catalin saw things differently. Anyway, Mike, do you agree that > > we could rewrite that separately in the future? > > I was talking to Mike on IRC last night and I think you still need a > flag, otherwise you could get a recursive memblock -> kmemleak -> > memblock call (that's why we have SLAB_NOLEAKTRACE). So for the time > being, a new MEMBLOCK_* definition would do. > > I wonder whether we could actually use the bottom bits in the end/limit > as actual flags so one can do (MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE | > MEMBLOCK_NOLEAKTRACE). But that could be for a separate clean-up. We never restricted end/limit to be on a word boundary, but I doubt that in practice we'd ever have the low bits set. I'm not entirely happy with using end limit parameter for this, I'd like to see how much churn it will be to extend some of memblock_*_alloc with an explicit flags parameter. -- Sincerely yours, Mike.