From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80DD2C6778A for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 13:13:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 419C820844 for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 13:13:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 419C820844 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388443AbeGXOUN (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2018 10:20:13 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:57094 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388265AbeGXOUN (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2018 10:20:13 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 917F3ACFC; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 13:13:44 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 15:13:43 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: David Hildenbrand Cc: Vlastimil Babka , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Baoquan He , Dave Young , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Hari Bathini , Huang Ying , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Marc-Andr=E9?= Lureau , Matthew Wilcox , Miles Chen , Pavel Tatashin , Petr Tesarik Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/2] mm/kdump: exclude reserved pages in dumps Message-ID: <20180724131343.GK28386@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20180720123422.10127-1-david@redhat.com> <9f46f0ed-e34c-73be-60ca-c892fb19ed08@suse.cz> <20180723123043.GD31229@dhcp22.suse.cz> <8daae80c-871e-49b6-1cf1-1f0886d3935d@redhat.com> <20180724072536.GB28386@dhcp22.suse.cz> <8eb22489-fa6b-9825-bc63-07867a40d59b@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8eb22489-fa6b-9825-bc63-07867a40d59b@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue 24-07-18 14:17:12, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 24.07.2018 09:25, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Mon 23-07-18 19:20:43, David Hildenbrand wrote: > >> On 23.07.2018 14:30, Michal Hocko wrote: > >>> On Mon 23-07-18 13:45:18, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > >>>> On 07/20/2018 02:34 PM, David Hildenbrand wrote: > >>>>> Dumping tools (like makedumpfile) right now don't exclude reserved pages. > >>>>> So reserved pages might be access by dump tools although nobody except > >>>>> the owner should touch them. > >>>> > >>>> Are you sure about that? Or maybe I understand wrong. Maybe it changed > >>>> recently, but IIRC pages that are backing memmap (struct pages) are also > >>>> PG_reserved. And you definitely do want those in the dump. > >>> > >>> You are right. reserve_bootmem_region will make all early bootmem > >>> allocations (including those backing memmaps) PageReserved. I have asked > >>> several times but I haven't seen a satisfactory answer yet. Why do we > >>> even care for kdump about those. If they are reserved the nobody should > >>> really look at those specific struct pages and manipulate them. Kdump > >>> tools are using a kernel interface to read the content. If the specific > >>> content is backed by a non-existing memory then they should simply not > >>> return anything. > >>> > >> > >> "new kernel" provides an interface to read memory from "old kernel". > >> > >> The new kernel has no idea about > >> - which memory was added/online in the old kernel > >> - where struct pages of the old kernel are and what their content is > >> - which memory is save to touch and which not > >> > >> Dump tools figure all that out by interpreting the VMCORE. They e.g. > >> identify "struct pages" and see if they should be dumped. The "new > >> kernel" only allows to read that memory. It cannot hinder to crash the > >> system (e.g. if a dump tool would try to read a hwpoison page). > >> > >> So how should the "new kernel" know if a page can be touched or not? > > > > I am sorry I am not familiar with kdump much. But from what I remember > > it reads from /proc/vmcore and implementation of this interface should > > simply return EINVAL or alike when you try to dump inaccessible memory > > range. > > Oh, and BTW, while something like -EINVAL could work, we usually don't > want to try to read certain pages at all (e.g. ballooned pages - > accessing the page might work but involves quite some overhead in the > hypervisor). > > So we should either handle this in dump tools (reserved + ...?) or while > doing the read similar to XEN (is_ram_page()). Yes, I think this is the proper way. Just test for PageOnline in read_from_oldmem/copy_oldmem_page. Btw. we already page pfn_to_online_page which performs the per-section online/offline status. This should be extendable to consider your new PageOffline state. > I wonder if we could convert the early allocated memory (PG_reserved) at > some point (buddy initialized) into ordinary "simply allocated" memory. I do not think so. There is good reason why we keep them reserved. There are many pfn walkers that simply shouldn't touch those pages. Maybe we can achieve a page reserve type for all usages but that will be a larger project I am afraid. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs