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 kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C16F3C433F5 for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id C6B826B0078; Wed, 18 May 2022 09:31:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id C1AC96B007B; Wed, 18 May 2022 09:31:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id ABCE08D0001; Wed, 18 May 2022 09:31:35 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0012.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.12]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9ECF06B0078 for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 09:31:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin03.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay09.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C6DF32242 for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:35 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79478950950.03.7D0AEA0 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) by imf11.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99A83400CD for ; Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 24ICrwKi029894; Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:32 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : content-transfer-encoding : in-reply-to; s=pp1; bh=n6RkeiMlQ3Uwhku+S25hPN1Cub1ZH5SPR80xoV8sWuU=; b=WJe52TKWf1J42lS0D43OJSBc/nI5BVpWlQn4iF383xDFUecmEZi4QGMSZlv30l/VZ03D aVACAJ+GmmcD7d2kmwq8DydeqS/bl0waIE/XRrebT1O5M9lGJ2jyzHLSE1TbSxSsnLRn LKyYmfIiUCvY/Y9i5bGrtWGSDpiCMqANtLkdrf0f45xhpNQwFE32PMZSE3EvqXttOqTb 5xMZAve+u2yRRPRou0RZXvbdjSv1AUflZtijhQnHYEuoNEqCTFxXLcj+aydjkp/1KvMk B1dIVwCj88g/vULqCpVdDjDkA6AzCGb7NwrJ2kb2wYIbIOHFeNVAOq503MGw5loHXoQL +Q== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3g516w118c-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:32 +0000 Received: from m0098413.ppops.net (m0098413.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 24ICt2tr031943; Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:31 GMT Received: from ppma05fra.de.ibm.com (6c.4a.5195.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [149.81.74.108]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3g516w117p-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:31 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05fra.de.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05fra.de.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 24IDS4uu025015; Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:30 GMT Received: from b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay09.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.194]) by ppma05fra.de.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3g4j3ggvm2-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:29 +0000 Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.58]) by b06cxnps3074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 24IDVRGC50397616 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:27 GMT Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAD674C044; Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0394A4C040; Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:27 +0000 (GMT) Received: from linux.ibm.com (unknown [9.145.2.119]) by d06av22.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 18 May 2022 13:31:26 +0000 (GMT) Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 16:31:24 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Jaewon Kim Cc: Andrew Morton , Jaewon Kim , Vlastimil Babka , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Joonsoo Kim Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] page_ext: create page extension for all memblock memory regions Message-ID: References: <20220509074330.4822-1-jaewon31.kim@samsung.com> <20220516173321.67402b7f09eacc43d4e476f4@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: Nlli5OUDCpmZiJzO56rGlCzzAPJZJknA X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: eEVS-yoS7Asvof-tlx0K-lQ7ipnKIgOP X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.874,Hydra:6.0.486,FMLib:17.11.64.514 definitions=2022-05-18_04,2022-05-17_02,2022-02-23_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1015 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2202240000 definitions=main-2205180076 Authentication-Results: imf11.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=WJe52TKW; spf=pass (imf11.hostedemail.com: domain of rppt@linux.ibm.com designates 148.163.158.5 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=rppt@linux.ibm.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=ibm.com X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam05 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 99A83400CD X-Stat-Signature: yy4gn4mu6cw6p18bg3upqddjkkbhxj5g X-HE-Tag: 1652880687-656104 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 Tue, May 17, 2022 at 10:10:20PM +0900, Jaewon Kim wrote: > 64 > 59 > > 2022년 5월 17일 (화) 오후 9:55, Mike Rapoport 님이 작성: > > > > On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 08:38:18PM +0900, Jaewon Kim wrote: > > > Hello Mike Rapoport > > > Thank you for your comment. > > > > > > Oh really? Could you point out the code or the commit regarding 'all > > > struct pages in any section should be valid and > > > properly initialized' ? > > > > There were several commits that refactored the memory map initialization, > > freeing of the unused memory map and abuse of pfn_valid() as a substitute > > of "is memory valid" semantics. > > > > > Actually I am using v5.10 based source tree on an arm64 device. > > > > Then most probably your change is not relevant for the upstream kernel. > > Did you observe any issues with page_ext initialization on v5.18-rcN > > kernels? > > Actually I observed only 59 sections were initialized for page_ext and > missed 5 sections. > It should be totally 64 sections * 128 MB = 8,192 MB Does this happen with v5.10 based kernel or with v5.18-rcN based kernel? > > > I tried to look up and found the following commit in v5.16-rc1, did > > > you mean this? > > > 3de360c3fdb3 arm64/mm: drop HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID > > > > Yes, this is one of those commits. > > > > > I guess memblock_is_memory code in pfn_valid in arch/arm64/mm/init.c, v5.10 > > > might affect the page_ext_init. > > > > Yes. In 5.10 the pfn_valid() test in page_ext_init() will skip an entire > > section if the first pfn in that section is not memory that can be mapped > > in the linear map. > > > > But again, this should be fixed in the latest kernels. > > Great! Thank you for your explanation. > I will check it someday later when I use the latest kernel on our devices. > The next version on our devices seems to be v5.15 though. > > Thank you > Jaewon Kim -- Sincerely yours, Mike.