On Tue, Jun 21, 2022 at 02:24:01PM +0800, Kefeng Wang wrote: > On 2022/6/21 13:33, Baoquan He wrote: > > On 06/13/22 at 04:09pm, Zhen Lei wrote: > > > If the crashkernel has both high memory above DMA zones and low memory > > > in DMA zones, kexec always loads the content such as Image and dtb to the > > > high memory instead of the low memory. This means that only high memory > > > requires write protection based on page-level mapping. The allocation of > > > high memory does not depend on the DMA boundary. So we can reserve the > > > high memory first even if the crashkernel reservation is deferred. > > > > > > This means that the block mapping can still be performed on other kernel > > > linear address spaces, the TLB miss rate can be reduced and the system > > > performance will be improved. > > > > Ugh, this looks a little ugly, honestly. > > > > If that's for sure arm64 can't split large page mapping of linear > > region, this patch is one way to optimize linear mapping. Given kdump > > setting is necessary on arm64 server, the booting speed is truly > > impacted heavily. > > Is there some conclusion or discussion that arm64 can't split large page > mapping? > > Could the crashkernel reservation (and Kfence pool) be splited dynamically? > > I found Mark replay "arm64: remove page granularity limitation from > KFENCE"[1], > > "We also avoid live changes from block<->table mappings, since the > archtitecture gives us very weak guarantees there and generally requires > a Break-Before-Make sequence (though IIRC this was tightened up > somewhat, so maybe going one way is supposed to work). Unless it's > really necessary, I'd rather not split these block mappings while > they're live." The problem with splitting is that you can end up with two entries in the TLB for the same VA->PA mapping (e.g. one for a 4KB page and another for a 2MB block). In the lucky case, the CPU will trigger a TLB conflict abort (but can be worse like loss of coherency). Prior to FEAT_BBM (added in ARMv8.4), such scenario was not allowed at all, the software would have to unmap the range, TLBI, remap. With FEAT_BBM (level 2), we can do this without tearing the mapping down but we still need to handle the potential TLB conflict abort. The handler only needs a TLBI but if it touches the memory range being changed it risks faulting again. With vmap stacks and the kernel image mapped in the vmalloc space, we have a small window where this could be handled but we probably can't go into the C part of the exception handling (tracing etc. may access a kmalloc'ed object for example). Another option is to do a stop_machine() (if multi-processor at that point), disable the MMUs, modify the page tables, re-enable the MMU but it's also complicated. -- Catalin _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
