Re: [v8 PATCH] arm64: mm: show direct mapping use in /proc/meminfo

[Will Deacon]

On Tue, Jun 09, 2026 at 05:06:31PM -0700, Yang Shi wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/9/26 2:42 PM, Yang Shi wrote:
> > Since commit a166563e7ec3 ("arm64: mm: support large block mapping when
> > rodata=full"), the direct mapping may be split on some machines instead
> > keeping static since boot. It makes more sense to show the direct mapping
> > use in /proc/meminfo than before.
> > This patch will make /proc/meminfo show the direct mapping use like the
> > below (4K base page size):
> > DirectMap4K:       94792 kB
> > DirectMap64K:     134208 kB
> > DirectMap2M:     1173504 kB
> > DirectMap32M:    5636096 kB
> > DirectMap1G:    529530880 kB
> > 
> > Although just the machines which support BBML2_NOABORT can split the
> > direct mapping, show it on all machines regardless of BBML2_NOABORT so
> > that the users have consistent view in order to avoid confusion.
> > 
> > Although ptdump also can tell the direct map use, but it needs to dump
> > the whole kernel page table. It is costly and overkilling. It is also
> > in debugfs which may not be enabled by all distros. So showing direct
> > map use in /proc/meminfo seems more convenient and has less overhead.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Yang Shi <yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c | 200 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >   1 file changed, 179 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
> > 
> > v8: * Fixed the double accounting per Sashiko
> >      * Responded the review comments from Sashiko
> > v7: * Rebased to v7.1-rc4
> >      * Changed "dm" to "lm" to follow ARM convention per Will
> >      * Used __is_lm_alias() instead of reinventing a new helper per Will
> > v6: * Rebased to v7.0-rc3
> >      * Rebased on top of Anshuman's v5 "arm64/mm: Enable batched TLB flush
> >        in unmap_hotplug_range()"
> >      * Used const for direct map type array per Will
> >      * Defined PUD size for 16K/64K even though it is not used per Will
> >      * Removed the misleading comment in init_pmd() per Will
> > v5: * Rebased to v6.19-rc4
> >      * Fixed the build error for !CONFIG_PROC_FS
> > v4: * Used PAGE_END instead of _PAGE_END(VA_BITS_MIN) per Ryan
> >      * Used shorter name for the helpers and variables per Ryan
> >      * Fixed accounting for memory hotunplug
> > v3: * Fixed the over-accounting problems per Ryan
> >      * Introduced helpers for add/sub direct map use and #ifdef them with
> >        CONFIG_PROC_FS per Ryan
> >      * v3 is a fix patch on top of v2
> > v2: * Counted in size instead of the number of entries per Ryan
> >      * Removed shift array per Ryan
> >      * Use lower case "k" per Ryan
> >      * Fixed a couple of build warnings reported by kernel test robot
> >      * Fixed a couple of poential miscounts
> 
> Aha, Sashiko is so fast. 2 comments this time.
> 
> #1
> > Will these updates suffer from data races?
> > The lm_meminfo array tracks direct mapping statistics and is updated using
> > non-atomic += and -= operations. These updates are invoked from multiple
> > independent code paths that do not share a common lock.
> > For example, runtime page permission changes call
> > split_kernel_leaf_mapping_locked() which executes under
> > pgtable_split_lock,
> > while memory hotplug operations like arch_remove_memory() execute under
> > mem_hotplug_lock. Because these paths can run concurrently on different
> > CPUs,
> > the non-atomic arithmetic could result in data races and lost updates.
> 
> Yes, it may race with memory hotplug. I missed memory hotplug for v7
> Sashiko. Two options to solve it:
> 
> 1. Use atomic variables. Make lm_meminfo[NR_LM_TYPE] atomic_long_t, then
> manipulate it with atomic ops.
> 2. Protect it with a spin lock.
> 
> The contention for the cache line or the spin lock should be rare since
> memory hotplug should happen rarely. Any preference?

I'd vote for keeping it simple and using a lock. Might be worth looking
at the ongoing work from Lorenzo:

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260717-series-vmap-race-fix-v5-0-606a0ac6d3e5@xxxxxxxxxx/

Will