From: Dev Jain <dev.jain@arm.com>
To: Wen Jiang <jiangwenxiaomi@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, urezki@gmail.com,
will@kernel.org, Xueyuan.chen21@gmail.com, ajd@linux.ibm.com,
anshuman.khandual@arm.com, david@kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rppt@kernel.org,
ryan.roberts@arm.com, Wen Jiang <jiangwen6@xiaomi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/6] mm/vmalloc: Speed up ioremap, vmalloc and vmap with contiguous memory
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2026 20:43:14 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54434a84-51b3-4e3f-988b-6bcbac5a2f42@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHKocdH5kp5kTtZht+v5j-4-Thh40TGvif3=kRMgErRXr+Q+RQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/07/26 2:24 pm, Wen Jiang wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jul 2026 at 07:08, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 9 Jul 2026 15:38:17 +0800 Wen Jiang <jiangwenxiaomi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> This patchset accelerates ioremap, vmalloc, and vmap when the memory
>>> is physically fully or partially contiguous.
>>
>> Thanks, I added this to mm.git's mm-new branch for wider testing.
>>
>> AI review asked some questions, and some of them are new since the v5
>> series:
>> https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260709073823.6643-1-jiangwen6@xiaomi.com
>
> Hi Andrew,
>
> I've gone through the Sashiko findings:
>
> - Patch 1 (find_num_contig): Over-interpretation. No new hugetlbfs hstate
> is added. The extra sizes are only used by init_mm kernel mappings via.
>
> - Patch 5/6 (NULL page): Invalid input. vmap() expects a fully populated
> array of valid struct page pointers.
Correct, but vmap_pages_pte_range has !page and !pfn_valid checks.
I really hate those checks - if those checks have any remote possibility of
firing, then we already have a bug at
vm_map_ram -> vmap_pages_range -> vmap_pages_range_noflush -> kmsan_vmap_pages_range_noflush
because the last function dereferences the struct page pointers.
It is painful to do the page array sanity check deep into vmap - it implies
we simply cannot play with the page array before that.
But since vmap is an exported function, doing a sanity check for the page array
in the vmap code makes sense.
So how about the following:
diff --git a/mm/vmalloc.c b/mm/vmalloc.c
index afaa14ebf17bb..0c44bb7a45b5d 100644
--- a/mm/vmalloc.c
+++ b/mm/vmalloc.c
@@ -566,14 +566,6 @@ static int vmap_pages_pte_range(pmd_t *pmd, unsigned long addr,
err = -EBUSY;
break;
}
- if (WARN_ON(!page)) {
- err = -ENOMEM;
- break;
- }
- if (WARN_ON(!pfn_valid(page_to_pfn(page)))) {
- err = -EINVAL;
- break;
- }
pfn = page_to_pfn(page);
size = vmap_set_ptes(pte, addr, end, pfn, prot, shift);
@@ -603,11 +595,6 @@ static int vmap_pages_pmd_range(pud_t *pud, unsigned long addr,
struct page *page = pages[*nr];
phys_addr_t phys_addr;
- if (WARN_ON(!page))
- return -ENOMEM;
- if (WARN_ON(!pfn_valid(page_to_pfn(page))))
- return -EINVAL;
-
phys_addr = page_to_phys(page);
if (vmap_try_huge_pmd(pmd, addr, next, phys_addr, prot,
@@ -3663,6 +3650,19 @@ static struct vm_struct *vmap_get_aligned_vm_area(unsigned long size,
return __get_vm_area_node_aligned_caller(size, PAGE_SIZE, flags, caller);
}
+static inline bool vmap_page_sanity_checks(struct page **pages, unsigned int count)
+{
+ for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i) {
+ if (WARN_ON(!pages[i]))
+ return true;
+
+ if (WARN_ON(!pfn_valid(page_to_pfn(pages[i]))))
+ return true;
+ }
+
+ return false;
+}
+
/**
* vmap - map an array of pages into virtually contiguous space
* @pages: array of page pointers
@@ -3706,6 +3706,9 @@ void *vmap(struct page **pages, unsigned int count,
if (!area)
return NULL;
+ if (unlikely(vmap_page_sanity_checks(pages, count)))
+ return NULL;
+
addr = (unsigned long)area->addr;
if (vmap_pages_range_batched(addr, addr + size, pgprot_nx(prot),
pages) < 0) {
Reasoning for calling vmap_page_sanity_checks() before vmap_pages_range_batched,
and not at the start of vmap: I am worried that since vmap() is already very
fast, we may cause a regression:
vmap() -> scan page array with linear map pointers -> vmap_get_aligned_vm_area (does
memory allocation, throwing out the linear map VAs from cache and TLB) -> walk
the pgtables and again access cold page array.
Perhaps I am being very pedantic here. What do you think?
>
> - Patch 6 (32-bit count << PAGE_SHIFT overflow): Pre-existing. This was
> already discussed in the V3 thread, and a separate fix was proposed
> there.
>
> Thanks,
> Wen
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-13 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-09 7:38 Wen Jiang
2026-07-09 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 1/6] arm64/hugetlb: Extend batching of multiple CONT_PTE in a single PTE setup Wen Jiang
2026-07-14 6:54 ` Anshuman Khandual
2026-07-14 8:35 ` Wen Jiang
2026-07-09 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 2/6] arm64/vmalloc: Allow arch_vmap_pte_range_map_size to batch multiple CONT_PTE Wen Jiang
2026-07-14 7:13 ` Anshuman Khandual
2026-07-14 9:24 ` Wen Jiang
2026-07-15 2:49 ` Wen Jiang
2026-07-15 3:31 ` Anshuman Khandual
2026-07-09 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 3/6] mm/vmalloc: Extract vmap_set_ptes() to consolidate PTE mapping logic Wen Jiang
2026-07-09 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 4/6] mm/vmalloc: Extend page table walk to support larger page_shift sizes and eliminate page table rewalk Wen Jiang
2026-07-13 13:49 ` Dev Jain
2026-07-14 6:10 ` Wen Jiang
2026-07-14 6:45 ` Dev Jain
2026-07-13 14:33 ` Dev Jain
2026-07-09 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 5/6] mm/vmalloc: map contiguous pages in batches for vmap() if possible Wen Jiang
2026-07-13 15:19 ` Dev Jain
2026-07-14 5:16 ` Wen Jiang
2026-07-14 5:33 ` Dev Jain
2026-07-14 4:59 ` Dev Jain
2026-07-09 7:38 ` [PATCH v6 6/6] mm/vmalloc: align vm_area so vmap() can batch mappings Wen Jiang
2026-07-14 5:05 ` Dev Jain
2026-07-09 23:08 ` [PATCH v6 0/6] mm/vmalloc: Speed up ioremap, vmalloc and vmap with contiguous memory Andrew Morton
2026-07-10 8:54 ` Wen Jiang
2026-07-10 8:59 ` Wen Jiang
2026-07-13 15:13 ` Dev Jain [this message]
2026-07-13 17:30 ` Uladzislau Rezki
2026-07-14 4:34 ` Dev Jain
2026-07-14 8:36 ` Anshuman Khandual
2026-07-14 11:17 ` Dev Jain
2026-07-15 3:31 ` Wen Jiang
2026-07-15 4:05 ` Anshuman Khandual
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=54434a84-51b3-4e3f-988b-6bcbac5a2f42@arm.com \
--to=dev.jain@arm.com \
--cc=Xueyuan.chen21@gmail.com \
--cc=ajd@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=anshuman.khandual@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=jiangwen6@xiaomi.com \
--cc=jiangwenxiaomi@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=ryan.roberts@arm.com \
--cc=urezki@gmail.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®