Re: dax alignment problem on arm64 (and other achitectures)

[Pavel Tatashin]

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 2:06 PM Pavel Tatashin
<pasha.tatashin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > Definitely, but we should try figuring out what's going on here. I
> > > assume on x86-64 it behaves differently?
> >
> > Yes, we should root cause. I highly suspect that there is somewhere
> > alignment miscalculations happen that cause this memory waste with the
> > offset 16M. I am also not sure why the 2M label size was increased,
> > and  why 16M is now an alignment requirement.
>
> This appears to be because even if we set vmemmap to be outside of the
> dax device, the alignment calculates the maximum size of vmemmap for
> this device, and subtracts it from the devdax size.
> See [1], line 795 is where this offset is calculated.
>
> This also explains why with 64K pages, the 16M offset worked: because
> fewer struct pages were able to fit within 16M - label size.
>
> [1] https://soleen.com/source/xref/linux/drivers/nvdimm/pfn_devs.c?r=b7b3c01b&mo=18459&fi=718#795

Actually, strike the previous e-mail. The extra space is when we
reserve vmemmap from devdax. IFF we do it from mem, the extra space is
not added. Now, this alignment makes total sense.

Pasha