Re: [PATCH 2/3] Documentation: riscv: Add documentation that describes the VM layout
From: Alex Ghiti <alex@ghiti.fr>
Date: 2021-03-13 08:24:41
Also in:
linux-doc, linux-mm, linux-riscv, lkml
Hi Arnd, Le 3/11/21 à 3:42 AM, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
On Wed, Mar 10, 2021 at 8:12 PM Alex Ghiti [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Le 3/10/21 à 6:42 AM, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :quoted
On Thu, Feb 25, 2021 at 12:56 PM Alex Ghiti [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Le 2/25/21 à 5:34 AM, David Hildenbrand a écrit :quoted
| | | |> + ffffffc000000000 | -256 GB | ffffffc7ffffffff | 32 GB | kasanquoted
+ ffffffcefee00000 | -196 GB | ffffffcefeffffff | 2 MB | fixmap + ffffffceff000000 | -196 GB | ffffffceffffffff | 16 MB | PCI io + ffffffcf00000000 | -196 GB | ffffffcfffffffff | 4 GB | vmemmap + ffffffd000000000 | -192 GB | ffffffdfffffffff | 64 GB | vmalloc/ioremap space + ffffffe000000000 | -128 GB | ffffffff7fffffff | 126 GB | direct mapping of all physical memory^ So you could never ever have more than 126 GB, correct? I assume that's nothing new.Before this patch, the limit was 128GB, so in my sense, there is nothing new. If ever we want to increase that limit, we'll just have to lower PAGE_OFFSET, there is still some unused virtual addresses after kasan for example.Linus Walleij is looking into changing the arm32 code to have the kernel direct map inside of the vmalloc area, which would be another place that you could use here. It would be nice to not have too many different ways of doing this, but I'm not sure how hard it would be to rework your code, or if there are any downsides of doing this.This was what my previous version did: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/7/28. This approach was not welcomed very well and it fixed only the problem of the implementation of relocatable kernel. The second issue I'm trying to resolve here is to support both 3 and 4 level page tables using the same kernel without being relocatable (which would introduce performance penalty). I can't do it when the kernel mapping is in the vmalloc region since vmalloc region relies on PAGE_OFFSET which is different on both 3 and 4 level page table and that would then require the kernel to be relocatable.Ok, I see. I suppose it might work if you moved the direct-map to the lowest address and the vmalloc area (incorporating the kernel mapping, modules, pio, and fixmap at fixed addresses) to the very top of the address space, but you probably already considered and rejected that for other reasons.
Yes I considered it...when you re-proposed it :) I'm not opposed to your solution in the vmalloc region but I can't find any advantage over the current solution, are there ? That would harmonize with Linus's work, but then we'd be quite different from x86 address space. And by the way, thanks for having suggested the current solution in a previous conversation :) Thanks again, Alex
Arnd