Hi All,

At 12/07/2017 11:56 AM, Chao Fan wrote:
On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 11:09:24AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
On 12/07/17 at 10:53am, Chao Fan wrote:
On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 05:35:57PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
Hi Chao,

Yes, now the code looks much better than the last version.

On 12/05/17 at 04:51pm, Chao Fan wrote:
In current code, kaslr may choose the memory region in movable
nodes to extract kernel, which will make the nodes can't be hot-removed.
To solve it, we can specify the memory region in immovable node.
Create immovable_mem to store the regions in immovable_mem, where should
be chosen by kaslr.

Multiple regions can be specified, comma delimited.
Considering the usage of memory, only support for 4 regions.
4 regions contains 2 nodes at least, enough for kernel to extract.

Also change the "handle_mem_memmap" to "handle_mem_filter", since
it will not only handle memmap parameter now.

One concern is whether it will fail to do KASLR if only specify

Sorry, I think I have not understood your point.
So if there is something wrong, please let me know.

What I meant is whether we need check 'movable_node' and
'immovable_mem=' being specified together. If only specify 'movable_node',
we may need to return and do not do kaslr or do not do physical kaslr
since kernel could be located on movable mem region.

Indeed.

If *immovable_mem* is valid only when Kernel supports both
KASLR and Node hotplug(movable_node). we need check them together:

...
  else if (!strcmp(param, "movable_node")) {
        if (!strcmp(param, "immovable_mem"))
                parse_immovable_mem_regions(val);
        else
                //no KASLR or no node hotplug?

}
...

I think both are OK and have reasons, and I tend to not return.
Because if there is a parameter can solve the problem, but not specified.
It's a problem of user-level.
How do you think?


Seems we should clarify the scope of 'immovable_mem=' and document it.

Thanks,
        dou

Thanks,
Chao Fan


Otherwise it will do physical kaslr anyway, memory hotplug will be
impacted later.


I don't think if only specify "movable_node" will fail KASLR.
Since in this patchset(3/4), only disable kernel mirror. KASLR in
current upstream code didn't parse "movable_node".

"movable_node". Surely in this case it won't fail system, just hotplug
memory might be impacted if kernel is located on that, will FJ mind

Yes, it's the reason why I make this patchset.
In my personal understanding, "movable_node" is a beginning why I make
this patchset, but not the whole reason.
Only "movable_node" specified might cause hotplug memory can't be
removed if kernel is located on that, so we need the help of
"immovable_mem=". "movable_node" help hotplug memory can be removed, and
"immovable_mem=" works for the same target, but just in kaslr.
So up to now, there is not a very tight coupling between "movable_node"
and "immovable_mem=". The independence of "immovable_mem=" is that,
help kaslr selects the right regions, avoid the memory in hotpluggable
NUMA nodes, which causes the memory can't removed. It's a independent
reason why we need a parameter like "immovable_mem=".
So I think we should also handle it if only specify "immovable_mem="
without "movable_node".

Thanks,
Chao Fan

this? And what if only specify 'immovable_mem=' but without 'movable_node'?

Thanks
Baoquan


Signed-off-by: Chao Fan <fanc.f...@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
  arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
  1 file changed, 77 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
index a63fbc25ce84..0bbbaf5f6370 100644
--- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
+++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/kaslr.c
@@ -108,6 +108,15 @@ enum mem_avoid_index {
static struct mem_vector mem_avoid[MEM_AVOID_MAX]; +/* Only supporting at most 4 immovable memory regions with kaslr */
+#define MAX_IMMOVABLE_MEM      4
+
+/* Store the memory regions in immovable node */
+static struct mem_vector immovable_mem[MAX_IMMOVABLE_MEM];
+
+/* The immovable regions user specify, not more than 4 */
+static int num_immovable_region;
+
  static bool mem_overlaps(struct mem_vector *one, struct mem_vector *two)
  {
        /* Item one is entirely before item two. */
@@ -168,6 +177,38 @@ parse_memmap(char *p, unsigned long long *start, unsigned 
long long *size)
        return -EINVAL;
  }
+static int parse_immovable_mem(char *p,
+                              unsigned long long *start,
+                              unsigned long long *size)
+{
+       char *oldp;
+
+       if (!p)
+               return -EINVAL;
+
+       oldp = p;
+       *size = memparse(p, &p);
+       if (p == oldp)
+               return -EINVAL;
+
+       /* We support nn[KMG]@ss[KMG] and nn[KMG]. */
+       switch (*p) {
+       case '@':
+               *start = memparse(p + 1, &p);
+               return 0;
+       default:
+               /*
+                * If w/o offset, only size specified, immovable_mem=nn[KMG]
+                * has the same behaviour as immovable_mem=nn[KMG]@0. It means
+                * the region starts from 0.
+                */
+               *start = 0;
+               return 0;
+       }
+
+       return -EINVAL;
+}
+
  static void mem_avoid_memmap(char *str)
  {
        static int i;
@@ -207,7 +248,37 @@ static void mem_avoid_memmap(char *str)
                memmap_too_large = true;
  }
-static int handle_mem_memmap(void)
+#ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG
+static void parse_immovable_mem_regions(char *str)
+{
+       static int i;
+
+       while (str && (i < MAX_IMMOVABLE_MEM)) {
+               int rc;
+               unsigned long long start, size;
+               char *k = strchr(str, ',');
+
+               if (k)
+                       *k++ = 0;
+
+               rc = parse_immovable_mem(str, &start, &size);
+               if (rc < 0)
+                       break;
+               str = k;
+
+               immovable_mem[i].start = start;
+               immovable_mem[i].size = size;
+               i++;
+       }
+       num_immovable_region = i;
+}
+#else
+static inline void parse_immovable_mem_regions(char *str)
+{
+}
+#endif
+
+static int handle_mem_filter(void)
  {
        char *args = (char *)get_cmd_line_ptr();
        size_t len = strlen((char *)args);
@@ -215,7 +286,8 @@ static int handle_mem_memmap(void)
        char *param, *val;
        u64 mem_size;
- if (!strstr(args, "memmap=") && !strstr(args, "mem="))
+       if (!strstr(args, "memmap=") && !strstr(args, "mem=") &&
+           !strstr(args, "immovable_mem="))
                return 0;
tmp_cmdline = malloc(len + 1);
@@ -240,6 +312,8 @@ static int handle_mem_memmap(void)
if (!strcmp(param, "memmap")) {
                        mem_avoid_memmap(val);
+               } else if (!strcmp(param, "immovable_mem")) {
+                       parse_immovable_mem_regions(val);
                } else if (!strcmp(param, "mem")) {
                        char *p = val;
@@ -379,7 +453,7 @@ static void mem_avoid_init(unsigned long input, unsigned long input_size,
        /* We don't need to set a mapping for setup_data. */
/* Mark the memmap regions we need to avoid */
-       handle_mem_memmap();
+       handle_mem_filter();
#ifdef CONFIG_X86_VERBOSE_BOOTUP
        /* Make sure video RAM can be used. */
--
2.14.3












Reply via email to