All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Holzheu <holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei.yes@gmail.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
	HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	Jan Willeke <willeke@de.ibm.com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kdump/mmap: Fix mmap of /proc/vmcore for s390
Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 14:52:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130525145217.0549138a@holzheu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51A076FE.3060604@gmail.com>

On Sat, 25 May 2013 16:31:58 +0800
Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei.yes@gmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

> For s390, if we put swap info into the elf header, This will
> change /sbin/kexec. But at this point, copy_oldmem_page is still
> doing the swap when we try to read the pages among [0 - OLDMEM_SIZE]
> and [OLDMEM_BASE - OLDMEM_BASE + OLDMEM_SIZE]. So removing the swap
> in copy_oldmem_page should be done at the same time. New kexec with
> old kernels would fail and old kexec with new kernels would fail too.
> 
> So could you please explain more about the ""backwards compatible".
> And please correct me if I am wrong.

Hello all,

I think Zhang is right and in theory we are not backwards compatible
because with the ELF header fix old kexec tools would no longer work
with new kernels.

But:

For s390 we normally do *not* create the ELF header in the old
kernel with kexec. Instead the new kernel does all the memory and CPU
detection and creates the ELF header in the new memory.

See also our current discussion with Vivek:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/24/164

The main reason why we did this for s390 was that we can have many
CPU hotplug events because of a s390 specific daemon called
"cpuplugd" (s390-tools). We wanted to avoid the kdump reloading with
kexec triggered by CPU and memory hotplug events. For s390 distributions
the kexec udev rules are disabled.

Besides of the newmem mechanism, for completeness, we also implemented
the oldmem ELF header mechansim in kexec. But this is disabled
by default.

See: "#ifdef WITH_ELF_HEADER" in kexec/arch/s390/crashdump-s390.c

Currently no distribution uses the oldmem mechanism.

Therefore, if necessary, IMHO we can switch to the ELF header memory
swap mechanism for s390 in the kernel. Of course we would then also
have to adjust the (disabled) kexec code.

Best Regards,
Michael


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michael Holzheu <holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei.yes@gmail.com>
Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
	Jan Willeke <willeke@de.ibm.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kdump/mmap: Fix mmap of /proc/vmcore for s390
Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 14:52:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130525145217.0549138a@holzheu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51A076FE.3060604@gmail.com>

On Sat, 25 May 2013 16:31:58 +0800
Zhang Yanfei <zhangyanfei.yes@gmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

> For s390, if we put swap info into the elf header, This will
> change /sbin/kexec. But at this point, copy_oldmem_page is still
> doing the swap when we try to read the pages among [0 - OLDMEM_SIZE]
> and [OLDMEM_BASE - OLDMEM_BASE + OLDMEM_SIZE]. So removing the swap
> in copy_oldmem_page should be done at the same time. New kexec with
> old kernels would fail and old kexec with new kernels would fail too.
> 
> So could you please explain more about the ""backwards compatible".
> And please correct me if I am wrong.

Hello all,

I think Zhang is right and in theory we are not backwards compatible
because with the ELF header fix old kexec tools would no longer work
with new kernels.

But:

For s390 we normally do *not* create the ELF header in the old
kernel with kexec. Instead the new kernel does all the memory and CPU
detection and creates the ELF header in the new memory.

See also our current discussion with Vivek:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/5/24/164

The main reason why we did this for s390 was that we can have many
CPU hotplug events because of a s390 specific daemon called
"cpuplugd" (s390-tools). We wanted to avoid the kdump reloading with
kexec triggered by CPU and memory hotplug events. For s390 distributions
the kexec udev rules are disabled.

Besides of the newmem mechanism, for completeness, we also implemented
the oldmem ELF header mechansim in kexec. But this is disabled
by default.

See: "#ifdef WITH_ELF_HEADER" in kexec/arch/s390/crashdump-s390.c

Currently no distribution uses the oldmem mechanism.

Therefore, if necessary, IMHO we can switch to the ELF header memory
swap mechanism for s390 in the kernel. Of course we would then also
have to adjust the (disabled) kexec code.

Best Regards,
Michael


_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

  reply	other threads:[~2013-05-25 12:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-05-24 13:08 [PATCH 0/2] kdump/mmap: Fix mmap of /proc/vmcore for s390 Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 13:08 ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 13:08 ` [PATCH 1/2] kdump/mmap: Introduce arch_oldmem_remap_pfn_range() Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 13:08   ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 13:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] s390/kdump/mmap: Implement arch_oldmem_remap_pfn_range() for s390 Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 13:08   ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 14:36 ` [PATCH 0/2] kdump/mmap: Fix mmap of /proc/vmcore " Vivek Goyal
2013-05-24 14:36   ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-24 15:06   ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 15:06     ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 15:28     ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-24 15:28       ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-24 16:46       ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 16:46         ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 17:05         ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-24 17:05           ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-25 13:13           ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-25 13:13             ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-24 22:44       ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-24 22:44         ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-25  0:33         ` Zhang Yanfei
2013-05-25  0:33           ` Zhang Yanfei
2013-05-25  3:01           ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-25  3:01             ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-25  8:31             ` Zhang Yanfei
2013-05-25  8:31               ` Zhang Yanfei
2013-05-25 12:52               ` Michael Holzheu [this message]
2013-05-25 12:52                 ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-28 13:55                 ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-28 13:55                   ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-29 11:51                   ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-29 11:51                     ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-29 16:23                     ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-29 16:23                       ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-29 17:12                       ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-29 17:12                         ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-30 15:00                         ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-30 15:00                           ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-30 20:38                     ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-30 20:38                       ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-31 14:21                       ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-31 14:21                         ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-31 16:01                         ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-31 16:01                           ` Vivek Goyal
2013-06-03 13:27                           ` Michael Holzheu
2013-06-03 13:27                             ` Michael Holzheu
2013-06-03 15:59                             ` Vivek Goyal
2013-06-03 15:59                               ` Vivek Goyal
2013-06-03 16:48                               ` Michael Holzheu
2013-06-03 16:48                                 ` Michael Holzheu
2013-05-28 14:44                 ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-28 14:44                   ` Vivek Goyal
2013-05-25 20:36               ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-05-25 20:36                 ` Eric W. Biederman

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=20130525145217.0549138a@holzheu \
    --to=holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=willeke@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=zhangyanfei.yes@gmail.com \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.