On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 06:44:23PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 02:17:15PM +0000, Kalra, Ashish wrote:
> > [AMD Official Use Only - General]
> >
> > >> On Tue, Aug 09, 2022 at 06:55:43PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > >> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 11:03:43PM +0000, Ashish Kalra wrote:
> > >> > > + pfn = pte_pfn(*pte);
> > >> > > +
> > >> > > + /* If its large page then calculte the fault pfn */
> > >> > > + if (level > PG_LEVEL_4K) {
> > >> > > + unsigned long mask;
> > >> > > +
> > >> > > + mask = pages_per_hpage(level) - pages_per_hpage(level - 1);
> > >> > > + pfn |= (address >> PAGE_SHIFT) & mask;
> > >> >
> > >> > Oh boy, this is unnecessarily complicated. Isn't this
> > >> >
> > >> > pfn |= pud_index(address);
> > >> >
> > >> > or
> > >> > pfn |= pmd_index(address);
> > >>
> > >> I played with this a bit and ended up with
> > >>
> > >> pfn = pte_pfn(*pte) | PFN_DOWN(address & page_level_mask(level
> > >> - 1));
> > >>
> > >> Unless I got something terribly wrong, this should do the same (see
> > >> the attached patch) as the existing calculations.
> >
> > >Actually, I don't think they're the same. I think Jarkko's version is correct. Specifically:
> > >- For level = PG_LEVEL_2M they're the same.
> > >- For level = PG_LEVEL_1G:
> > >The current code calculates a garbage mask:
> > >mask = pages_per_hpage(level) - pages_per_hpage(level - 1); translates to:
> > >>> hex(262144 - 512)
> > >'0x3fe00'
> >
> > No actually this is not a garbage mask, as I explained in earlier responses we need to capture the address bits
> > to get to the correct 4K index into the RMP table.
> > Therefore, for level = PG_LEVEL_1G:
> > mask = pages_per_hpage(level) - pages_per_hpage(level - 1) => 0x3fe00 (which is the correct mask).
> >
> > >But I believe Jarkko's version calculates the correct mask (below), incorporating all 18 offset bits into the 1G page.
> > >>> hex(262144 -1)
> > >'0x3ffff'
> >
> > We can get this simply by doing (page_per_hpage(level)-1), but as I mentioned above this is not what we need.
>
> I think you're correct, so I'll retry:
>
> (address / PAGE_SIZE) & (pages_per_hpage(level) - pages_per_hpage(level - 1)) =
>
> (address / PAGE_SIZE) & ((page_level_size(level) / PAGE_SIZE) - (page_level_size(level - 1) / PAGE_SIZE)) =
>
> [ factor out 1 / PAGE_SIZE ]
>
> (address & (page_level_size(level) - page_level_size(level - 1))) / PAGE_SIZE =
>
> [ Substitute with PFN_DOWN() ]
>
> PFN_DOWN(address & (page_level_size(level) - page_level_size(level - 1)))
>
> So you can just:
>
> pfn = pte_pfn(*pte) | PFN_DOWN(address & (page_level_size(level) - page_level_size(level - 1)));
>
> Which is IMHO way better still what it is now because no branching
> and no ad-hoc helpers (the current is essentially just page_level_size
> wrapper).
I created a small test program:
$ cat test.c
#include <stdio.h>
int main(void)
{
unsigned long arr[] = {0x8, 0x1000, 0x200000, 0x40000000, 0x8000000000};
int i;
for (i = 1; i < sizeof(arr)/sizeof(unsigned long); i++) {
printf("%048b\n", arr[i] - arr[i - 1]);
printf("%048b\n", (arr[i] - 1) ^ (arr[i - 1] - 1));
}
}
kultaheltta in linux on host-snp-v7 [?]
$ gcc -o test test.c
kultaheltta in linux on host-snp-v7 [?]
$ ./test
000000000000000000000000000000000000111111111000
000000000000000000000000000000000000111111111000
000000000000000000000000000111111111000000000000
000000000000000000000000000111111111000000000000
000000000000000000111111111000000000000000000000
000000000000000000111111111000000000000000000000
000000000000000011000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000011000000000000000000000000000000
So the operation could be described as:
pfn = PFN_DOWN(address & (~page_level_mask(level) ^ ~page_level_mask(level - 1)));
Which IMHO already documents itself quite well: index
with the granularity of PGD by removing bits used for
PGD's below it.
BR, Jarkko
