qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] mmap-alloc: use same backend for all mappings


From: Greg Kurz
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] mmap-alloc: use same backend for all mappings
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 11:37:55 +0100

On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 18:59:23 +0200
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 02:46:31PM +0100, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > On Mon, 30 Nov 2015 15:06:33 +0200
> > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <address@hidden> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 11:51:57AM +0100, Greg Kurz wrote:
> > > > Since commit 8561c9244ddf1122d "exec: allocate PROT_NONE pages on top 
> > > > of RAM",
> > > > it is no longer possible to back guest RAM with hugepages on ppc64 
> > > > hosts:
> > > > 
> > > > mmap(NULL, 285212672, PROT_NONE, MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_ANONYMOUS, -1, 0) = 
> > > > 0x3fff57000000
> > > > mmap(0x3fff57000000, 268435456, PROT_READ|PROT_WRITE, 
> > > > MAP_PRIVATE|MAP_FIXED, 19, 0) = -1 EBUSY (Device or resource busy)
> > > > 
> > > > This is due to a limitation on ppc64 that requires MAP_FIXED mappings 
> > > > to have
> > > > the same page size as other mappings already present in the same 
> > > > "slice" of
> > > > virtual address space (Cc'ing Ben for details).
> > > 
> > > I'd like some details please.
> > > What do you mean when you say "same page size" and "slice"?
> > > 
> > 
> > On ppc64, the address space is divided in 256MB-sized segments where all 
> > pages
> > have the same size. This is a hw limitation IIUC. I don't know if it can be
> > fixed and I'll let Ben comment on it.
> 
> But it's anonymous memory with PROT_NONE.  There should be no pages there:
> just a chunk of virtual memory reserved.
> 

This is orthogonal: the page size check happens when doing get_unmapped_area() 
where
we don't care for protection bits... On ppc64, it is about finding a "chunk" of 
virtual
memory with the same page size because hw requires it. In the case of 
MAP_FIXED, this
becomes an error because we already have a "chunk" with incompatible page size.

> > Hugepage support is implemented using an abstraction of segments called
> > "slices". Here's a quote from the related commit changelog in the kernel
> > tree:
> > 
> > commit d0f13e3c20b6fb73ccb467bdca97fa7cf5a574cd
> > Author: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <address@hidden>
> > Date:   Tue May 8 16:27:27 2007 +1000
> > 
> >     [POWERPC] Introduce address space "slices"
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> >     The main issues are:
> >     
> >      - To maintain/keep track of the page size per "segment" (as we can
> >     only have one page size per segment on powerpc, which are 256MB
> >     divisions of the address space).
> >     
> >      - To make sure special mappings stay within their allotted
> >     "segments" (including MAP_FIXED crap)
> >     
> >      - To make sure everybody else doesn't mmap/brk/grow_stack into a
> >     "segment" that is used for a special mapping
> > ...
> > 
> > > > This is exactly what happens
> > > > when calling mmap() above: first one uses native host page size (64k) 
> > > > and
> > > > second one uses huge page size (16M).
> > > > 
> > > > To be sure we always have the same page size, let's use the same 
> > > > backend for
> > > > both calls to mmap(): this is enough to fix the ppc64 issue.
> > > > 
> > > > This has no effect on RAM based mappings.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <address@hidden>
> > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > This is a bug fix for 2.5
> > > > 
> > > >  util/mmap-alloc.c |    3 ++-
> > > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/util/mmap-alloc.c b/util/mmap-alloc.c
> > > > index c37acbe58ede..0ff221dd94f4 100644
> > > > --- a/util/mmap-alloc.c
> > > > +++ b/util/mmap-alloc.c
> > > > @@ -21,7 +21,8 @@ void *qemu_ram_mmap(int fd, size_t size, size_t 
> > > > align, bool shared)
> > > >       * space, even if size is already aligned.
> > > >       */
> > > >      size_t total = size + align;
> > > > -    void *ptr = mmap(0, total, PROT_NONE, MAP_ANONYMOUS | MAP_PRIVATE, 
> > > > -1, 0);
> > > > +    void *ptr = mmap(0, total, PROT_NONE,
> > > > +                     (fd == -1 ? MAP_ANONYMOUS : 0) | MAP_PRIVATE, fd, 
> > > > 0);
> > > >      size_t offset = QEMU_ALIGN_UP((uintptr_t)ptr, align) - 
> > > > (uintptr_t)ptr;
> > > >      void *ptr1;
> > > >  
> > > 
> 




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]