On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 01:02:45PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > On 09/05/2020 19:50, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 07:16:27PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > >> On 09/05/2020 19:13, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > >>> On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 06:52:24PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: > >>>> I tried this change: > >>>> diff --git a/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c b/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c > >>>> index 4deed86a76d1a..b834b7f0388b7 100644 > >>>> --- a/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c > >>>> +++ b/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c > >>>> _at__at_ -345,7 +345,7 _at__at_ pmap_pku_mask_bit(pmap_t pmap) > >>>> #define NPV_LIST_LOCKS MAXCPU > >>>> > >>>> #define PHYS_TO_PV_LIST_LOCK(pa) \ > >>>> - (&pv_list_locks[pa_index(pa) % NPV_LIST_LOCKS]) > >>>> + (&pv_list_locks[((pa) >> PDRSHIFT) % NPV_LIST_LOCKS]) > >>>> #endif > >>>> > >>>> #define CHANGE_PV_LIST_LOCK_TO_PHYS(lockp, pa) do { \ > >>>> > >>>> It fixed the original problem, but I got a new panic. > >>>> "DI already started" in pmap_remove() -> pmap_delayed_invl_start_u(). > >>>> I guess that !NUMA variant does not get much testing, so I'll probably just > >>>> stick with the default. > >>> Why didn't you just removed the KASSERT from pa_index ? > >> > >> Well, I thought it might be useful in the NUMA case. > >> pa_index() definition is shared between both cases. > > Might be define the macro two times, for NUMA/non-NUMA. non-NUMA case > > does not need the assert, because users take it mod NPV_LIST_LOCKS. > > Yes, this works. > Thank you! > > diff --git a/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c b/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c > index 4deed86a76d1a..8dd236acc8205 100644 > --- a/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c > +++ b/sys/amd64/amd64/pmap.c > _at__at_ -323,12 +323,12 _at__at_ pmap_pku_mask_bit(pmap_t pmap) > #endif > > #undef pa_index > +#ifdef NUMA > #define pa_index(pa) ({ \ > KASSERT((pa) <= vm_phys_segs[vm_phys_nsegs - 1].end, \ > ("address %lx beyond the last segment", (pa))); \ > (pa) >> PDRSHIFT; \ > }) > -#ifdef NUMA > #define pa_to_pmdp(pa) (&pv_table[pa_index(pa)]) > #define pa_to_pvh(pa) (&(pa_to_pmdp(pa)->pv_page)) > #define PHYS_TO_PV_LIST_LOCK(pa) ({ \ > _at__at_ -340,6 +340,7 _at__at_ pmap_pku_mask_bit(pmap_t pmap) > _lock; \ > }) > #else > +#define pa_index(pa) ((pa) >> PDRSHIFT) > #define pa_to_pvh(pa) (&pv_table[pa_index(pa)]) > > #define NPV_LIST_LOCKS MAXCPU Looks good to me.Received on Sun May 10 2020 - 08:25:44 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:24 UTC