From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com> To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, riel@surriel.com, kernel-team@fb.com, Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mhocko@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Satheesh Rajendran <sathnaga@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@darnok.org>, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, guro@fb.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] memblock: do not start bottom-up allocations with kernel_end Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2021 20:58:07 -0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <87ft26yuwg.fsf@manicouagan.localdomain> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210124073421.GG6332@kernel.org> Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> writes: > On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 06:09:11PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 01:37:14 -0300 Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com> wrote: >> >> > Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> writes: >> > >> > > > Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> >> > > >> > > Reviewed-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> >> > >> > I've seen a couple of spurious triggers of the WARN_ONCE() removed by this >> > patch. This happens on some ppc64le bare metal (powernv) server machines with >> > CONFIG_SWIOTLB=y and crashkernel=4G, as described in a candidate patch I posted >> > to solve this issue in a different way: >> > >> > https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20201218062103.76102-1-bauerman@linux.ibm.com/ >> > >> > Since this patch solves that problem, is it possible to include it in the next >> > feasible v5.11-rcX, with the following tag? >> >> We could do this, if we're confident that this patch doesn't depend on >> [1/2] "mm: cma: allocate cma areas bottom-up"? I think it is... > > A think it does not depend on cma bottom-up allocation, it's rather the other > way around: without this CMA bottom-up allocation could fail with KASLR > enabled. I noticed that this patch is now upstream as: 2dcb39645441 memblock: do not start bottom-up allocations with kernel_end > Still, this patch may need updates to the way x86 does early reservations: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210115083255.12744-1-rppt@kernel.org ... but the patches from this link still aren't. Isn't this a potential problem for x86? The patch series on the link above is now superseded by v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20210128105711.10428-1-rppt@kernel.org/ -- Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com> To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> Cc: riel@surriel.com, iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com, Ram Pai <linuxram@us.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mhocko@kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Satheesh Rajendran <sathnaga@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, guro@fb.com, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad@darnok.org>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kernel-team@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] memblock: do not start bottom-up allocations with kernel_end Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2021 20:58:07 -0300 [thread overview] Message-ID: <87ft26yuwg.fsf@manicouagan.localdomain> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20210124073421.GG6332@kernel.org> Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> writes: > On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 06:09:11PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: >> On Fri, 22 Jan 2021 01:37:14 -0300 Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.ibm.com> wrote: >> >> > Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> writes: >> > >> > > > Signed-off-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com> >> > > >> > > Reviewed-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com> >> > >> > I've seen a couple of spurious triggers of the WARN_ONCE() removed by this >> > patch. This happens on some ppc64le bare metal (powernv) server machines with >> > CONFIG_SWIOTLB=y and crashkernel=4G, as described in a candidate patch I posted >> > to solve this issue in a different way: >> > >> > https://lore.kernel.org/linuxppc-dev/20201218062103.76102-1-bauerman@linux.ibm.com/ >> > >> > Since this patch solves that problem, is it possible to include it in the next >> > feasible v5.11-rcX, with the following tag? >> >> We could do this, if we're confident that this patch doesn't depend on >> [1/2] "mm: cma: allocate cma areas bottom-up"? I think it is... > > A think it does not depend on cma bottom-up allocation, it's rather the other > way around: without this CMA bottom-up allocation could fail with KASLR > enabled. I noticed that this patch is now upstream as: 2dcb39645441 memblock: do not start bottom-up allocations with kernel_end > Still, this patch may need updates to the way x86 does early reservations: > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210115083255.12744-1-rppt@kernel.org ... but the patches from this link still aren't. Isn't this a potential problem for x86? The patch series on the link above is now superseded by v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20210128105711.10428-1-rppt@kernel.org/ -- Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-08 23:59 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2020-12-17 20:12 [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: cma: allocate cma areas bottom-up Roman Gushchin 2020-12-17 20:12 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] memblock: do not start bottom-up allocations with kernel_end Roman Gushchin 2020-12-19 14:52 ` Wonhyuk Yang 2020-12-19 14:52 ` Wonhyuk Yang 2020-12-19 17:05 ` Roman Gushchin 2020-12-20 6:49 ` Mike Rapoport 2021-01-22 4:37 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2021-01-22 4:37 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2021-01-24 2:09 ` Andrew Morton 2021-01-24 2:09 ` Andrew Morton 2021-01-24 7:34 ` Mike Rapoport 2021-01-24 7:34 ` Mike Rapoport 2021-01-26 0:30 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2021-01-26 0:30 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2021-02-08 23:58 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message] 2021-02-08 23:58 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann 2021-02-28 4:18 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-02-28 9:00 ` Mike Rapoport 2021-02-28 18:19 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-02-28 23:08 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-01 3:50 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-03-01 3:50 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-03-01 9:22 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-01 9:22 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-02 4:09 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-03-02 4:09 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-03-02 13:26 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-02 4:19 ` [PATCH] MIPS: BMIPS: Reserve exception base to prevent corruption Florian Fainelli 2021-03-02 8:09 ` Mike Rapoport 2021-03-02 13:54 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-02 19:04 ` Roman Gushchin 2021-03-02 23:54 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer 2021-03-03 1:30 ` Florian Fainelli 2021-03-03 9:41 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer 2021-03-03 17:45 ` Maciej W. Rozycki 2021-03-03 18:15 ` Thomas Bogendoerfer 2021-03-03 21:50 ` Maciej W. Rozycki 2021-03-01 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] memblock: do not start bottom-up allocations with kernel_end Mike Rapoport 2021-03-01 9:45 ` Mike Rapoport 2021-03-02 3:55 ` Roman Gushchin 2021-03-02 3:55 ` Roman Gushchin 2021-03-02 13:08 ` Serge Semin 2021-03-23 18:19 ` [tip: x86/boot] x86/setup: Consolidate early memory reservations tip-bot2 for Mike Rapoport 2020-12-20 6:48 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] mm: cma: allocate cma areas bottom-up Mike Rapoport 2020-12-21 17:05 ` Roman Gushchin 2020-12-23 4:06 ` Andrew Morton 2020-12-23 16:35 ` Roman Gushchin 2020-12-23 22:10 ` Mike Rapoport 2020-12-28 19:36 ` Roman Gushchin
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=87ft26yuwg.fsf@manicouagan.localdomain \ --to=bauerman@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \ --cc=guro@fb.com \ --cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \ --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \ --cc=konrad@darnok.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \ --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \ --cc=linuxram@us.ibm.com \ --cc=mhocko@kernel.org \ --cc=riel@surriel.com \ --cc=rppt@kernel.org \ --cc=sathnaga@linux.vnet.ibm.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: linkBe 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.