From: Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@kernel.org>
To: "Pratik R. Sampat" <prsampat@amd.com>
Cc: "David Hildenbrand (arm)" <david@kernel.org>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-coco@lists.linux.dev, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
ardb@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, osalvador@suse.de,
thomas.lendacky@amd.com, michael.roth@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] mm/memory_hotplug: Add support to accept memory during hot-add
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 10:48:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aYR0vqwyFPo3EKAi@thinkstation> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <70be936e-e49d-4485-8d1e-416fdf8f40a4@amd.com>
On Wed, Feb 04, 2026 at 09:50:09PM -0600, Pratik R. Sampat wrote:
>
>
> On 2/4/26 2:00 PM, David Hildenbrand (arm) wrote:
> >> #endif
> >> static inline bool pfn_is_unaccepted_memory(unsigned long pfn)
> >> diff --git a/mm/memory_hotplug.c b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> >> index a63ec679d861..549ccfd190ee 100644
> >> --- a/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> >> +++ b/mm/memory_hotplug.c
> >> @@ -1567,6 +1567,8 @@ int add_memory_resource(int nid, struct resource *res, mhp_t mhp_flags)
> >> if (!strcmp(res->name, "System RAM"))
> >> firmware_map_add_hotplug(start, start + size, "System RAM");
> >> + accept_hotplug_memory(start, size);
> >> +
> >> /* device_online() will take the lock when calling online_pages() */
> >> mem_hotplug_done();
> >>
> >
> > I really hate that accepting (and un-accepting) hotplugged memory is different to accepting ordinary boot memory.
> >
> > Is there really no way we can get a reasonable implementation where we just call a generic accept_memory() and it will know what to do?
> >
>
> Sure, that shouldn't be impossible.
>
> The only reason I initially kept them separate is because we accept and update
> the bitmap unconditionally. This mainly applies to cold-plugged memory since
> their bitmap state after remove shouldn't matter. However, as we are now
> correctly setting the bits in the hot-remove path we should be fine accepting
> from the for_each_set_bitrange_from() logic within accept_memory(), I think.
>
> Something like so?
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/efi/unaccepted_memory.c b/drivers/firmware/efi/unaccepted_memory.c
> index d11e7836200a..e56adfd382f8 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/efi/unaccepted_memory.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/efi/unaccepted_memory.c
> @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ void accept_memory(phys_addr_t start, unsigned long size)
> unsigned long range_start, range_end;
> struct accept_range range, *entry;
> phys_addr_t end = start + size;
> + phys_addr_t bitmap_end;
> unsigned long flags;
> u64 unit_size;
>
> @@ -44,6 +45,21 @@ void accept_memory(phys_addr_t start, unsigned long size)
> return;
>
> unit_size = unaccepted->unit_size;
> + bitmap_end = unaccepted->phys_base + unaccepted->size * unit_size * BITS_PER_BYTE;
> +
> + /* Memory completely beyond bitmap: hotplug memory, accept unconditionally */
> + if (start >= bitmap_end) {
> + arch_accept_memory(start, end);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + /* Memory partially beyond bitmap */
> + if (end > bitmap_end) {
> + arch_accept_memory(bitmap_end, end);
> + end = bitmap_end;
> + }
You are calling arch_accept_memory() on every memory allocation if the
memory is not represented in the bitmap. Hard NAK.
>
> /*
> * Only care for the part of the range that is represented
>
> unaccept_hotplug_memory() truly doesn't do anything special for hotplug so I
> could just re-name it unaccept_memory().
>
> Thanks!
>
--
Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-02-05 10:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-03 17:49 [PATCH v4 0/2] SEV-SNP Unaccepted Memory Hotplug Pratik R. Sampat
2026-02-03 17:49 ` [PATCH v4 1/2] mm/memory_hotplug: Add support to accept memory during hot-add Pratik R. Sampat
2026-02-04 11:22 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-02-04 19:59 ` David Hildenbrand (arm)
2026-02-05 3:50 ` Pratik R. Sampat
2026-02-05 10:51 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-02-04 20:00 ` David Hildenbrand (arm)
2026-02-05 3:50 ` Pratik R. Sampat
2026-02-05 10:48 ` Kiryl Shutsemau [this message]
2026-02-05 15:48 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-02-05 16:08 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-02-05 17:29 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-02-06 12:03 ` Kiryl Shutsemau
2026-02-16 14:45 ` Pratik R. Sampat
2026-02-03 17:49 ` [PATCH v4 2/2] x86/sev: Add support to unaccept memory after hot-remove Pratik R. Sampat
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=aYR0vqwyFPo3EKAi@thinkstation \
--to=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-coco@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=michael.roth@amd.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=osalvador@suse.de \
--cc=prsampat@amd.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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