On Wed, 19 Nov 2014, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 10:56:26PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Wed, 19 Nov 2014, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > I got a report lately involving context tracking. Not sure if it's
> > > the same here but the issue was that context tracking uses per cpu data
> > > and per cpu allocation use vmalloc and vmalloc'ed area can fault due to
> > > lazy paging.
> >
> > This is complete nonsense. pcpu allocations are populated right
> > away. Otherwise no single line of kernel code which uses dynamically
> > allocated per cpu storage would be safe.
>
> Note this isn't faulting because part of the allocation is
> swapped. No it's all reserved in the physical memory, but it's a
> lazy allocation. Part of it isn't yet addressed in the
> P[UGM?]D. That's what vmalloc_fault() is for.
Sorry, I can't follow your argumentation here.
pcpu_alloc()
....
area_found:
....
/* clear the areas and return address relative to base address */
for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
memset((void *)pcpu_chunk_addr(chunk, cpu, 0) + off, 0, size);
How would that memset fail to establish the mapping, which is
btw. already established via:
pcpu_populate_chunk()
already before that memset?
Are we talking about different per cpu allocators here or am I missing
something completely non obvious?
Thanks,
tglx
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
