From: Zhenhua Huang <quic_zhenhuah@quicinc.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>, <will@kernel.org>, <ardb@kernel.org>,
<ryan.roberts@arm.com>, <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
<joey.gouly@arm.com>, <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
<akpm@linux-foundation.org>, <chenfeiyang@loongson.cn>,
<chenhuacai@kernel.org>, <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <quic_tingweiz@quicinc.com>,
<stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] arm64: mm: Populate vmemmap/linear at the page level for hotplugged sections
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 17:46:45 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f1e61bf3-31b8-4c81-8e6a-5a5f93926663@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e3e62864-f914-4ecd-bd26-0363ea72e991@redhat.com>
On 2025/2/14 2:20, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 13.02.25 18:56, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 05:16:37PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>> On 13.02.25 16:49, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Feb 13, 2025 at 01:59:25PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>>>>> On 13.02.25 08:57, Zhenhua Huang wrote:
>>>>>> On the arm64 platform with 4K base page config, SECTION_SIZE_BITS
>>>>>> is set
>>>>>> to 27, making one section 128M. The related page struct which vmemmap
>>>>>> points to is 2M then.
>>>>>> Commit c1cc1552616d ("arm64: MMU initialisation") optimizes the
>>>>>> vmemmap to populate at the PMD section level which was suitable
>>>>>> initially since hot plug granule is always one section(128M).
>>>>>> However,
>>>>>> commit ba72b4c8cf60 ("mm/sparsemem: support sub-section hotplug")
>>>>>> introduced a 2M(SUBSECTION_SIZE) hot plug granule, which disrupted
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> existing arm64 assumptions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Considering the vmemmap_free -> unmap_hotplug_pmd_range path, when
>>>>>> pmd_sect() is true, the entire PMD section is cleared, even if
>>>>>> there is
>>>>>> other effective subsection. For example page_struct_map1 and
>>>>>> page_strcut_map2 are part of a single PMD entry and they are hot-
>>>>>> added
>>>>>> sequentially. Then page_struct_map1 is removed, vmemmap_free()
>>>>>> will clear
>>>>>> the entire PMD entry freeing the struct page map for the whole
>>>>>> section,
>>>>>> even though page_struct_map2 is still active. Similar problem exists
>>>>>> with linear mapping as well, for 16K base page(PMD size = 32M) or 64K
>>>>>> base page(PMD = 512M), their block mappings exceed SUBSECTION_SIZE.
>>>>>> Tearing down the entire PMD mapping too will leave other subsections
>>>>>> unmapped in the linear mapping.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To address the issue, we need to prevent PMD/PUD/CONT mappings for
>>>>>> both
>>>>>> linear and vmemmap for non-boot sections if corresponding size on the
>>>>>> given base page exceeds SUBSECTION_SIZE(2MB now).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org> # v5.4+
>>>>>> Fixes: ba72b4c8cf60 ("mm/sparsemem: support sub-section hotplug")
>>>>>> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Zhenhua Huang <quic_zhenhuah@quicinc.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just so I understand correctly: for ordinary memory-sections-size
>>>>> hotplug
>>>>> (NVDIMM, virtio-mem), we still get a large mapping where possible?
>>>>
>>>> Up to 2MB blocks only since that's the SUBSECTION_SIZE value. The
>>>> vmemmap mapping is also limited to PAGE_SIZE mappings (we could use
>>>> contiguous mappings for vmemmap but it's not wired up; I don't think
>>>> it's worth the hassle).
>>>
>>> But that's messed up, no?
>>>
>>> If someone hotplugs a memory section, they have to hotunplug a memory
>>> section, not parts of it.
>>>
>>> That's why x86 does in vmemmap_populate():
>>>
>>> if (end - start < PAGES_PER_SECTION * sizeof(struct page))
>>> err = vmemmap_populate_basepages(start, end, node, NULL);
>>> else if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_PSE))
>>> err = vmemmap_populate_hugepages(start, end, node, altmap);
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Maybe I'm missing something. Most importantly, why the weird subsection
>>> stuff is supposed to degrade ordinary hotplug of dimms/virtio-mem etc.
>>
>> I think that's based on the discussion for a previous version assuming
>> that the hotplug/unplug sizes are not guaranteed to be symmetric:
>>
>> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/a720aaa5-a75e-481e-b396-
>> a5f2b50ed362@quicinc.com/
>>
> > If that's not the case, we can indeed ignore the SUBSECTION_SIZE>
> altogether and just rely on the start/end of the hotplugged region.
>
> All cases I know about hotunplug system RAM in the same granularity they
> hotplugged (virtio-mem, dax/kmem, dimm, dlpar), and if they wouldn't,
> they wouldn't operate on sub-section sizes either way.
>
> Regarding dax/pmem, I also recall that it happens always in the same
> granularity. If not, it should be fixed: this weird subsection hotplug
> should not make all other hotplug users suffer (e.g., no vmemmap PMD).
>
> What can likely happen (dax/pmem) is that we hotplug something that
> spans part of 128 MiB section (subsections), to then hotplug something
> that spans another part of a 128 MiB section (subsections).
> Hotunplugging either should not hotplug something part of the other
> device (e.g., rip out the vmemmap PMD).
>
> I think this was expressed with:
>
> "However, if start or end is not aligned to a section boundary, such as
> when a subsection is hot added, populating the entire section is
> wasteful." -- which is what we should focus on.
>
> I thought x86-64 would handle that case; it would surprise me if
> handling between both archs would have to differ in that regard: with 4k
> arm64 we have the same section/subsection sizes as on x86-64.
>
Thanks David and Catalin. From your discussion, I understand that
hotplug/unplug sizes are guaranteed to be symmetric ? Therefore, it
should be straightforward to populate to base pages if (end - start <
PAGES_PER_SECTION * sizeof(struct page)) ? I will write patch and verify.
Please correct me if my understanding is incorrect.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-14 9:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-13 7:57 Zhenhua Huang
2025-02-13 12:59 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-02-13 15:49 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-02-13 16:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-02-13 17:56 ` Catalin Marinas
2025-02-13 18:20 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-02-14 9:46 ` Zhenhua Huang [this message]
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=f1e61bf3-31b8-4c81-8e6a-5a5f93926663@quicinc.com \
--to=quic_zhenhuah@quicinc.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=chenfeiyang@loongson.cn \
--cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=joey.gouly@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=quic_tingweiz@quicinc.com \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=will@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