This patch was intended to apply the necessary changes for the 'ibm,dynamic-memory[-v2]' properties. Before the advent of the LMB representation, that code took up a lot more space. At this point, it has shrunk to only one line of unique change. I was hoping to include it here rather than create another patch.
But that can be done. Michael On 05/22/2018 04:11 PM, Thomas Falcon wrote: > On 05/21/2018 12:52 PM, Michael Bringmann wrote: >> migration/memory: This patch adds more recognition for changes to >> the associativity of memory blocks described by the device-tree >> properties and updates local and general kernel data structures to >> reflect those changes. These differences may include: >> >> * Evaluating 'ibm,dynamic-memory' properties when processing the >> topology of LPARS in Post Migration events. Previous efforts >> only recognized whether a memory block's assignment had changed >> in the property. Changes here include checking the aa_index >> values for each drc_index of the old/new LMBs and to 'readd' >> any block for which the setting has changed. >> >> * In an LPAR migration scenario, the "ibm,associativity-lookup-arrays" >> property may change. In the event that a row of the array differs, >> locate all assigned memory blocks with that 'aa_index' and 're-add' >> them to the system memory block data structures. In the process of >> the 're-add', the system routines will update the corresponding entry >> for the memory in the LMB structures and any other relevant kernel >> data structures. >> >> * Extend the previous work for the 'ibm,associativity-lookup-array' >> and 'ibm,dynamic-memory' properties to support the property >> 'ibm,dynamic-memory-v2' by means of the DRMEM LMB interpretation >> code. >> >> Signed-off-by: Michael Bringmann <[email protected]> >> --- >> Changes in RFC: >> -- Simplify code to update memory nodes during mobility checks. >> -- Reuse code from DRMEM changes to scan for LMBs when updating >> aa_index >> -- Combine common code for properties 'ibm,dynamic-memory' and >> 'ibm,dynamic-memory-v2' after integrating DRMEM features. >> -- Rearrange patches to co-locate memory property-related changes. >> -- Use new paired list iterator for the drmem info arrays. >> -- Use direct calls to add/remove memory from the update drconf >> function as those operations are only intended for user DLPAR >> ops, and should not occur during Migration reconfig notifier >> changes. >> -- Correct processing bug in processing of ibm,associativity-lookup-arrays >> -- Rebase to 4.17-rc5 kernel >> -- Apply minor code cleanups >> --- >> arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c | 153 >> ++++++++++++++++++----- >> 1 file changed, 121 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c >> b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c >> index c1578f5..ac329aa 100644 >> --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c >> +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hotplug-memory.c >> @@ -994,13 +994,11 @@ static int pseries_add_mem_node(struct device_node *np) >> return (ret < 0) ? -EINVAL : 0; >> } >> >> -static int pseries_update_drconf_memory(struct of_reconfig_data *pr) >> +static int pseries_update_drconf_memory(struct drmem_lmb_info *new_dinfo) >> { >> - struct of_drconf_cell_v1 *new_drmem, *old_drmem; >> + struct drmem_lmb *old_lmb, *new_lmb; >> unsigned long memblock_size; >> - u32 entries; >> - __be32 *p; >> - int i, rc = -EINVAL; >> + int rc = 0; >> >> if (rtas_hp_event) >> return 0; >> @@ -1009,42 +1007,124 @@ static int pseries_update_drconf_memory(struct >> of_reconfig_data *pr) >> if (!memblock_size) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> - p = (__be32 *) pr->old_prop->value; >> - if (!p) >> - return -EINVAL; >> + /* Arrays should have the same size and DRC indexes */ >> + for_each_pair_drmem_lmb(drmem_info, old_lmb, new_dinfo, new_lmb) { >> >> - /* The first int of the property is the number of lmb's described >> - * by the property. This is followed by an array of of_drconf_cell >> - * entries. Get the number of entries and skip to the array of >> - * of_drconf_cell's. >> - */ >> - entries = be32_to_cpu(*p++); >> - old_drmem = (struct of_drconf_cell_v1 *)p; >> - >> - p = (__be32 *)pr->prop->value; >> - p++; >> - new_drmem = (struct of_drconf_cell_v1 *)p; >> + if (new_lmb->drc_index != old_lmb->drc_index) >> + continue; >> >> - for (i = 0; i < entries; i++) { >> - if ((be32_to_cpu(old_drmem[i].flags) & DRCONF_MEM_ASSIGNED) && >> - (!(be32_to_cpu(new_drmem[i].flags) & DRCONF_MEM_ASSIGNED))) >> { >> + if ((old_lmb->flags & DRCONF_MEM_ASSIGNED) && >> + (!(new_lmb->flags & DRCONF_MEM_ASSIGNED))) { >> rc = pseries_remove_memblock( >> - be64_to_cpu(old_drmem[i].base_addr), >> - memblock_size); >> + old_lmb->base_addr, memblock_size); >> break; >> - } else if ((!(be32_to_cpu(old_drmem[i].flags) & >> - DRCONF_MEM_ASSIGNED)) && >> - (be32_to_cpu(new_drmem[i].flags) & >> - DRCONF_MEM_ASSIGNED)) { >> - rc = memblock_add(be64_to_cpu(old_drmem[i].base_addr), >> - memblock_size); >> + } else if ((!(old_lmb->flags & DRCONF_MEM_ASSIGNED)) && >> + (new_lmb->flags & DRCONF_MEM_ASSIGNED)) { >> + rc = memblock_add(old_lmb->base_addr, >> + memblock_size); >> rc = (rc < 0) ? -EINVAL : 0; >> break; >> + } else if ((old_lmb->aa_index != new_lmb->aa_index) && >> + (new_lmb->flags & DRCONF_MEM_ASSIGNED)) { >> + dlpar_queue_action(PSERIES_HP_ELOG_RESOURCE_MEM, >> + PSERIES_HP_ELOG_ACTION_READD, >> + new_lmb->drc_index); >> } >> } >> return rc; >> } >> >> +static void pseries_update_ala_memory_aai(int aa_index) >> +{ >> + struct drmem_lmb *lmb; >> + >> + /* Readd all LMBs which were previously using the >> + * specified aa_index value. >> + */ >> + for_each_drmem_lmb(lmb) { >> + if ((lmb->aa_index == aa_index) && >> + (lmb->flags & DRCONF_MEM_ASSIGNED)) { >> + dlpar_queue_action(PSERIES_HP_ELOG_RESOURCE_MEM, >> + PSERIES_HP_ELOG_ACTION_READD, >> + lmb->drc_index); >> + } >> + } >> +} >> + >> +struct assoc_arrays { >> + u32 n_arrays; >> + u32 array_sz; >> + const __be32 *arrays; >> +}; >> + >> +static int pseries_update_ala_memory(struct of_reconfig_data *pr) >> +{ >> + struct assoc_arrays new_ala, old_ala; >> + __be32 *p; >> + int i, lim; >> + >> + if (rtas_hp_event) >> + return 0; >> + >> + /* >> + * The layout of the ibm,associativity-lookup-arrays >> + * property is a number N indicating the number of >> + * associativity arrays, followed by a number M >> + * indicating the size of each associativity array, >> + * followed by a list of N associativity arrays. >> + */ >> + >> + p = (__be32 *) pr->old_prop->value; >> + if (!p) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + old_ala.n_arrays = of_read_number(p++, 1); >> + old_ala.array_sz = of_read_number(p++, 1); >> + old_ala.arrays = p; >> + >> + p = (__be32 *) pr->prop->value; >> + if (!p) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + new_ala.n_arrays = of_read_number(p++, 1); >> + new_ala.array_sz = of_read_number(p++, 1); >> + new_ala.arrays = p; >> + > > I don't know how often associativity lookup arrays needs to be parsed, but > maybe it would be helpful to create a helper function to parse those here. > >> + lim = (new_ala.n_arrays > old_ala.n_arrays) ? old_ala.n_arrays : >> + new_ala.n_arrays; >> + >> + if (old_ala.array_sz == new_ala.array_sz) { >> + >> + /* Reset any entries where the old and new rows >> + * the array have changed. >> + */ >> + for (i = 0; i < lim; i++) { >> + int index = (i * new_ala.array_sz); >> + >> + if (!memcmp(&old_ala.arrays[index], >> + &new_ala.arrays[index], >> + new_ala.array_sz)) >> + continue; >> + >> + pseries_update_ala_memory_aai(i); >> + } >> + >> + /* Reset any entries representing the extra rows. >> + * There shouldn't be any, but just in case ... >> + */ >> + for (i = lim; i < new_ala.n_arrays; i++) >> + pseries_update_ala_memory_aai(i); >> + >> + } else { >> + /* Update all entries representing these rows; >> + * as all rows have different sizes, none can >> + * have equivalent values. >> + */ >> + for (i = 0; i < lim; i++) >> + pseries_update_ala_memory_aai(i); >> + } >> + >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> static int pseries_memory_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb, >> unsigned long action, void *data) >> { >> @@ -1059,8 +1139,17 @@ static int pseries_memory_notifier(struct >> notifier_block *nb, >> err = pseries_remove_mem_node(rd->dn); >> break; >> case OF_RECONFIG_UPDATE_PROPERTY: >> - if (!strcmp(rd->prop->name, "ibm,dynamic-memory")) >> - err = pseries_update_drconf_memory(rd); >> + if (!strcmp(rd->prop->name, "ibm,dynamic-memory") || >> + !strcmp(rd->prop->name, "ibm,dynamic-memory-v2")) { >> + struct drmem_lmb_info *dinfo = >> + drmem_lmbs_init(rd->prop); >> + if (!dinfo) >> + return -EINVAL; >> + err = pseries_update_drconf_memory(dinfo); >> + drmem_lmbs_free(dinfo); > > Is this block above related to the other associativity changes? It seems to > be an update for dynamic-memory-v2, so should probably be in a separate patch. > > Thanks, > Tom > >> + } else if (!strcmp(rd->prop->name, >> + "ibm,associativity-lookup-arrays")) >> + err = pseries_update_ala_memory(rd); >> break; >> } >> return notifier_from_errno(err); > > > -- Michael W. Bringmann Linux Technology Center IBM Corporation Tie-Line 363-5196 External: (512) 286-5196 Cell: (512) 466-0650 [email protected]
