All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xunlei Pang <xpang@redhat.com>
To: Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@virtuozzo.com>, xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	ebiederm@xmission.com, 0x7f454c46@gmail.com,
	schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	dyoung@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec: unmap reserved pages for each error-return way
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 11:14:23 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56AAD90F.20201@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56A9D927.70402@virtuozzo.com>

On 2016/01/28 at 17:02, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> On 01/28/2016 05:58 AM, Xunlei Pang wrote:
>> Hi Dmitry,
>>  
>> On 2016/01/28 at 03:15, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Jan 2016 14:48:31 +0300 Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@virtuozzo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> For allocation of kimage failure or kexec_prepare or load segments
>>>> errors there is no need to keep crashkernel memory mapped.
>>>> It will affect only s390 as map/unmap hook defined only for it.
>>>> As on unmap s390 also changes os_info structure let's check return code
>>>> and add info only on success.
>>>>
>>> This conflicts (both mechanically and somewhat conceptually) with
>>> Xunlei Pang's "kexec: Introduce a protection mechanism for the
>>> crashkernel reserved memory" and "kexec: provide
>>> arch_kexec_protect(unprotect)_crashkres()".
>>>
>>> http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-introduce-a-protection-mechanism-for-the-crashkernel-reserved-memory.patch
>>> http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-introduce-a-protection-mechanism-for-the-crashkernel-reserved-memory-v4.patch
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-provide-arch_kexec_protectunprotect_crashkres.patch
>>> http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-provide-arch_kexec_protectunprotect_crashkres-v4.patch
>>>
>>> so can we please sort all that out?
>>
>> Ah, I've checked git-log history, they are almost the same idea, can crash_unmap/map_reserved_pages()
>> be re-implemented using the new  arch_kexec_unprotect/protect_crashkres() on S390?
> Sorry, didn't fetched akpm before sending.
> Yes, sounds like really right thing to do to have one united arch-helper.

Yeah, as Michael said, "memblock_remove(crash_base, crash_size)" creates a big hole in the kernel pgtable.
In order to have one united arch-helper, I guess we can forbid this to let the pgtable setup for crash memory,
then we can easily move the logic of crash_map_reserved_pages() to arch_kexec_unprotect_crashkres(),  and
move crash_unmap_reserved_pages() to arch_kexec_protect_crashkres(). After that crash_map_reserved_pages()
called in crash_shrink_memory() can be safely removed as well.

Regards,
Xunlei

>>
>> Regards,
>> Xunlei
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> kexec mailing list
>>> kexec@lists.infradead.org
>>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> Dmitry Safonov

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Xunlei Pang <xpang@redhat.com>
To: Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@virtuozzo.com>, xlpang@redhat.com
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	ebiederm@xmission.com, 0x7f454c46@gmail.com,
	schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com, dyoung@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec: unmap reserved pages for each error-return way
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 11:14:23 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <56AAD90F.20201@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56A9D927.70402@virtuozzo.com>

On 2016/01/28 at 17:02, Dmitry Safonov wrote:
> On 01/28/2016 05:58 AM, Xunlei Pang wrote:
>> Hi Dmitry,
>>  
>> On 2016/01/28 at 03:15, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> On Wed, 27 Jan 2016 14:48:31 +0300 Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov@virtuozzo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> For allocation of kimage failure or kexec_prepare or load segments
>>>> errors there is no need to keep crashkernel memory mapped.
>>>> It will affect only s390 as map/unmap hook defined only for it.
>>>> As on unmap s390 also changes os_info structure let's check return code
>>>> and add info only on success.
>>>>
>>> This conflicts (both mechanically and somewhat conceptually) with
>>> Xunlei Pang's "kexec: Introduce a protection mechanism for the
>>> crashkernel reserved memory" and "kexec: provide
>>> arch_kexec_protect(unprotect)_crashkres()".
>>>
>>> http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-introduce-a-protection-mechanism-for-the-crashkernel-reserved-memory.patch
>>> http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-introduce-a-protection-mechanism-for-the-crashkernel-reserved-memory-v4.patch
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-provide-arch_kexec_protectunprotect_crashkres.patch
>>> http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-provide-arch_kexec_protectunprotect_crashkres-v4.patch
>>>
>>> so can we please sort all that out?
>>
>> Ah, I've checked git-log history, they are almost the same idea, can crash_unmap/map_reserved_pages()
>> be re-implemented using the new  arch_kexec_unprotect/protect_crashkres() on S390?
> Sorry, didn't fetched akpm before sending.
> Yes, sounds like really right thing to do to have one united arch-helper.

Yeah, as Michael said, "memblock_remove(crash_base, crash_size)" creates a big hole in the kernel pgtable.
In order to have one united arch-helper, I guess we can forbid this to let the pgtable setup for crash memory,
then we can easily move the logic of crash_map_reserved_pages() to arch_kexec_unprotect_crashkres(),  and
move crash_unmap_reserved_pages() to arch_kexec_protect_crashkres(). After that crash_map_reserved_pages()
called in crash_shrink_memory() can be safely removed as well.

Regards,
Xunlei

>>
>> Regards,
>> Xunlei
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> kexec mailing list
>>> kexec@lists.infradead.org
>>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> Dmitry Safonov


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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2016-01-29  3:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-01-27 11:48 [PATCH] kexec: unmap reserved pages for each error-return way Dmitry Safonov
2016-01-27 11:48 ` Dmitry Safonov
2016-01-27 11:48 ` Dmitry Safonov
2016-01-27 19:15 ` Andrew Morton
2016-01-27 19:15   ` Andrew Morton
2016-01-27 19:15   ` Andrew Morton
2016-01-28 10:32   ` Michael Holzheu
2016-01-28 10:32     ` Michael Holzheu
2016-01-28 10:32     ` Michael Holzheu
2016-01-28 11:56     ` Xunlei Pang
2016-01-28 11:56       ` Xunlei Pang
2016-01-28 12:44       ` Michael Holzheu
2016-01-28 12:44         ` Michael Holzheu
2016-01-28 13:12         ` Xunlei Pang
2016-01-28 13:12           ` Xunlei Pang
2016-01-28 14:01           ` Michael Holzheu
2016-01-28 14:01             ` Michael Holzheu
     [not found]   ` <56A983F3.5010506@redhat.com>
     [not found]     ` <56A9D927.70402@virtuozzo.com>
2016-01-29  3:14       ` Xunlei Pang [this message]
2016-01-29  3:14         ` Xunlei Pang
2016-01-28  3:36 ` Xunlei Pang
2016-01-28  3:36   ` Xunlei Pang
2016-01-28  6:29 ` Minfei Huang
2016-01-28  6:29   ` Minfei Huang
2016-01-28  8:57   ` Dmitry Safonov
2016-01-28  8:57     ` Dmitry Safonov
2016-01-28  8:57     ` Dmitry Safonov
2016-02-02  5:45     ` Andrew Morton
2016-02-02  5:45       ` Andrew Morton
2016-02-02  5:45       ` Andrew Morton
2016-02-02 13:56       ` Minfei Huang
2016-02-02 13:56         ` Minfei Huang

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=56AAD90F.20201@redhat.com \
    --to=xpang@redhat.com \
    --cc=0x7f454c46@gmail.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=dsafonov@virtuozzo.com \
    --cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=xlpang@redhat.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.