From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=+4wI=W6=lists.ozlabs.org=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@kernel.org>
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=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1
	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 5B63FC3A5A2
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue,  3 Sep 2019 16:10:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D7DAC208E4
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue,  3 Sep 2019 16:10:08 +0000 (UTC)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org D7DAC208E4
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com
Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Received: from bilbo.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3])
	by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46NBk6020jzDqc2
	for <linuxppc-dev@archiver.kernel.org>; Wed,  4 Sep 2019 02:10:06 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from ozlabs.org (bilbo.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::2])
 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46NBct07zFzDqcw
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Wed,  4 Sep 2019 02:05:34 +1000 (AEST)
Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com
Received: from ozlabs.org (bilbo.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::2])
 by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46NBcr6471z8swt
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Wed,  4 Sep 2019 02:05:32 +1000 (AEST)
Received: by ozlabs.org (Postfix)
 id 46NBcr4ypnz9sBF; Wed,  4 Sep 2019 02:05:32 +1000 (AEST)
Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org;
 spf=pass (mailfrom) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com
 (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com;
 envelope-from=hbathini@linux.ibm.com; receiver=<UNKNOWN>)
Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com
Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com
 [148.163.156.1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46NBcq4Wynz9sDB
 for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Wed,  4 Sep 2019 02:05:31 +1000 (AEST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0098410.ppops.net [127.0.0.1])
 by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id
 x83FvLmG025776
 for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 12:05:28 -0400
Received: from e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com [195.75.94.99])
 by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2usu0bs1u5-1
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT)
 for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Tue, 03 Sep 2019 12:05:28 -0400
Received: from localhost
 by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only!
 Violators will be prosecuted
 for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org> from <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>;
 Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:05:26 +0100
Received: from b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (9.149.109.195)
 by e06smtp03.uk.ibm.com (192.168.101.133) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway:
 Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; 
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256)
 Tue, 3 Sep 2019 17:05:18 +0100
Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com
 [9.149.105.59])
 by b06cxnps3075.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id
 x83G5HGQ55967932
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK);
 Tue, 3 Sep 2019 16:05:17 GMT
Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1])
 by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8586A4053;
 Tue,  3 Sep 2019 16:05:16 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1])
 by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id F33ABA404D;
 Tue,  3 Sep 2019 16:05:14 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [9.85.81.203] (unknown [9.85.81.203])
 by d06av23.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP;
 Tue,  3 Sep 2019 16:05:14 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 02/31] powerpc/fadump: move internal code to a new file
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
 linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>
References: <156630261682.8896.3418665808003586786.stgit@hbathini.in.ibm.com>
 <156630266000.8896.13603358349585118846.stgit@hbathini.in.ibm.com>
 <871rwxskjo.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
From: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2019 21:35:13 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <871rwxskjo.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
x-cbid: 19090316-0012-0000-0000-000003462A92
X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused
x-cbparentid: 19090316-0013-0000-0000-000021807992
Message-Id: <7823769a-9e2c-9ae7-d12e-7d5e42f51355@linux.ibm.com>
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, ,
 definitions=2019-09-03_02:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0
 priorityscore=1501
 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=2 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0
 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0
 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx
 scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1906280000 definitions=main-1909030164
X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@linux.ibm.com>,
 Mahesh J Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.ibm.com>,
 Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>, Oliver <oohall@gmail.com>,
 Vasant Hegde <hegdevasant@linux.ibm.com>, Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org
Sender: "Linuxppc-dev"
 <linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org>



On 03/09/19 4:39 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com> writes:
>> Make way for refactoring platform specific FADump code by moving code
>> that could be referenced from multiple places to fadump-common.c file.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/powerpc/kernel/Makefile        |    2 
>>  arch/powerpc/kernel/fadump-common.c |  140 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  arch/powerpc/kernel/fadump-common.h |    8 ++
>>  arch/powerpc/kernel/fadump.c        |  146 ++---------------------------------
>>  4 files changed, 158 insertions(+), 138 deletions(-)
>>  create mode 100644 arch/powerpc/kernel/fadump-common.c
> 
> I don't understand why we need fadump.c and fadump-common.c? They're
> both common/shared across pseries & powernv aren't they?

The convention I tried to follow to have fadump-common.c shared between fadump.c,
pseries & powernv code while pseries & powernv code take callback requests from
fadump.c and use fadump-common.c (shared by both platforms), if necessary to fullfil
those requests...

> By the end of the series we end up with 149 lines in fadump-common.c
> which seems like a waste of time. Just put it all in fadump.c.

Yeah. Probably not worth a new C file. Will just have two separate headers. One for
internal code and one for interfacing with other modules...

[...]

>> + * Copyright 2019, IBM Corp.
>> + * Author: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>
> 
> These can just be:
> 
>  * Copyright 2011, Mahesh Salgaonkar, IBM Corporation.
>  * Copyright 2019, Hari Bathini, IBM Corporation.
> 

Sure.

>> + */
>> +
>> +#undef DEBUG
> 
> Don't undef DEBUG please.
> 

Sorry! Seeing such thing in most files, I thought this was the convention. Will drop
this change in all the new files I added.

>> +#define pr_fmt(fmt) "fadump: " fmt
>> +
>> +#include <linux/memblock.h>
>> +#include <linux/elf.h>
>> +#include <linux/mm.h>
>> +#include <linux/crash_core.h>
>> +
>> +#include "fadump-common.h"
>> +
>> +void *fadump_cpu_notes_buf_alloc(unsigned long size)
>> +{
>> +	void *vaddr;
>> +	struct page *page;
>> +	unsigned long order, count, i;
>> +
>> +	order = get_order(size);
>> +	vaddr = (void *)__get_free_pages(GFP_KERNEL|__GFP_ZERO, order);
>> +	if (!vaddr)
>> +		return NULL;
>> +
>> +	count = 1 << order;
>> +	page = virt_to_page(vaddr);
>> +	for (i = 0; i < count; i++)
>> +		SetPageReserved(page + i);
>> +	return vaddr;
>> +}
> 
> I realise you're just moving this code, but why do we need all this hand
> rolled allocation stuff?

Yeah, I think alloc_pages_exact() may be better here. Mahesh, am I missing something?

- Hari