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=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 574FFC433E0 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33BE820759 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726580AbgGQSeu (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:34:50 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:32560 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726104AbgGQSet (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:34:49 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06HIWvmn053972; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:34:40 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32autbkkau-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:34:39 -0400 Received: from m0098409.ppops.net (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 06HIYcJf065521; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:34:38 -0400 Received: from ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (1b.90.2fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.47.144.27]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32autbkk9x-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:34:38 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06HILB7I029041; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:37 GMT Received: from b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.24]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 327529jyyu-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:37 +0000 Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.110]) by b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 06HIYahq52036090 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:36 GMT Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90460AE060; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB42DAE05F; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from morokweng.localdomain (unknown [9.163.51.42]) by b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:31 +0000 (GMT) References: <159466074408.24747.10036072269371204890.stgit@hbathini.in.ibm.com> <159466085652.24747.2414199807974963385.stgit@hbathini.in.ibm.com> <87v9io8c13.fsf@morokweng.localdomain> <63d551a9-684b-768b-8b0f-2a0da68d7f11@linux.ibm.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.3 From: Thiago Jung Bauermann To: Hari Bathini Cc: Pingfan Liu , Nayna Jain , Kexec-ml , Mahesh J Salgaonkar , Mimi Zohar , lkml , linuxppc-dev , Sourabh Jain , Petr Tesarik , Andrew Morton , Dave Young , Vivek Goyal , Eric Biederman Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/12] powerpc/kexec_file: mark PPC64 specific code In-reply-to: <63d551a9-684b-768b-8b0f-2a0da68d7f11@linux.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 15:34:27 -0300 Message-ID: <87ft9quh1o.fsf@morokweng.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235,18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-17_09:2020-07-17,2020-07-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_definite policy=outbound score=100 spamscore=100 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=100 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=-1000 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007170129 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hari Bathini writes: > On 16/07/20 7:19 am, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >> >> I didn't forget about this patch. I just wanted to see more of the >> changes before comenting on it. >> >> Hari Bathini writes: >> >>> Some of the kexec_file_load code isn't PPC64 specific. Move PPC64 >>> specific code from kexec/file_load.c to kexec/file_load_64.c. Also, >>> rename purgatory/trampoline.S to purgatory/trampoline_64.S in the >>> same spirit. >> >> There's only a 64 bit implementation of kexec_file_load() so this is a >> somewhat theoretical exercise, but there's no harm in getting the code >> organized, so: >> >> Reviewed-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann >> >> I have just one question below. > > > >>> +/** >>> + * setup_new_fdt_ppc64 - Update the flattend device-tree of the kernel >>> + * being loaded. >>> + * @image: kexec image being loaded. >>> + * @fdt: Flattened device tree for the next kernel. >>> + * @initrd_load_addr: Address where the next initrd will be loaded. >>> + * @initrd_len: Size of the next initrd, or 0 if there will be none. >>> + * @cmdline: Command line for the next kernel, or NULL if there will >>> + * be none. >>> + * >>> + * Returns 0 on success, negative errno on error. >>> + */ >>> +int setup_new_fdt_ppc64(const struct kimage *image, void *fdt, >>> + unsigned long initrd_load_addr, >>> + unsigned long initrd_len, const char *cmdline) >>> +{ >>> + int chosen_node, ret; >>> + >>> + /* Remove memory reservation for the current device tree. */ >>> + ret = delete_fdt_mem_rsv(fdt, __pa(initial_boot_params), >>> + fdt_totalsize(initial_boot_params)); >>> + if (ret == 0) >>> + pr_debug("Removed old device tree reservation.\n"); >>> + else if (ret != -ENOENT) { >>> + pr_err("Failed to remove old device-tree reservation.\n"); >>> + return ret; >>> + } >>> + >>> + ret = setup_new_fdt(image, fdt, initrd_load_addr, initrd_len, >>> + cmdline, &chosen_node); >>> + if (ret) >>> + return ret; >>> + >>> + ret = fdt_setprop(fdt, chosen_node, "linux,booted-from-kexec", NULL, 0); >>> + if (ret) >>> + pr_err("Failed to update device-tree with linux,booted-from-kexec\n"); >>> + >>> + return ret; >>> +} >> >> For setup_purgatory_ppc64() you start with an empty function and build >> from there, but for setup_new_fdt_ppc64() you moved some code here. Is >> the code above 64 bit specific? > > Actually, I was not quiet sure if fdt updates like in patch 6 & patch 9 can be > done after setup_ima_buffer() call. If you can confirm, I will move them back > to setup_purgatory() Hari and I discussed this off-line and we came to the conclusion that theis code can be moved back to setup_new_fdt(). -- Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center 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=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no 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 18BC1C433DF for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:37:07 +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 C81D120704 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:37:06 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C81D120704 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 4B7fww2CnWzDqf6 for ; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 04:37:04 +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 4B7ftH2tsKzDqPw for ; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 04:34:47 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Received: from ozlabs.org (bilbo.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.1]) by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B7ftH1cXSz8tVG for ; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 04:34:47 +1000 (AEST) Received: by ozlabs.org (Postfix) id 4B7ftH0xqlz9sRk; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 04:34:47 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.156.1; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=bauerman@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (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 4B7ftG5DRBz9sPB for ; Sat, 18 Jul 2020 04:34:46 +1000 (AEST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06HIWvmn053972; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:34:40 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32autbkkau-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:34:39 -0400 Received: from m0098409.ppops.net (m0098409.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 06HIYcJf065521; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:34:38 -0400 Received: from ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (1b.90.2fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.47.144.27]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32autbkk9x-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 14:34:38 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06HILB7I029041; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:37 GMT Received: from b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.198.24]) by ppma05wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 327529jyyu-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:37 +0000 Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com [9.57.199.110]) by b01cxnp22034.gho.pok.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 06HIYahq52036090 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:36 GMT Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90460AE060; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB42DAE05F; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from morokweng.localdomain (unknown [9.163.51.42]) by b01ledav005.gho.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:34:31 +0000 (GMT) References: <159466074408.24747.10036072269371204890.stgit@hbathini.in.ibm.com> <159466085652.24747.2414199807974963385.stgit@hbathini.in.ibm.com> <87v9io8c13.fsf@morokweng.localdomain> <63d551a9-684b-768b-8b0f-2a0da68d7f11@linux.ibm.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.2.0; emacs 26.3 From: Thiago Jung Bauermann To: Hari Bathini Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 02/12] powerpc/kexec_file: mark PPC64 specific code In-reply-to: <63d551a9-684b-768b-8b0f-2a0da68d7f11@linux.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2020 15:34:27 -0300 Message-ID: <87ft9quh1o.fsf@morokweng.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-17_09:2020-07-17, 2020-07-17 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_spam_definite policy=outbound score=100 spamscore=100 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=100 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=-1000 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007170129 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Pingfan Liu , Petr Tesarik , Nayna Jain , Kexec-ml , Mahesh J Salgaonkar , Mimi Zohar , lkml , linuxppc-dev , Sourabh Jain , Andrew Morton , Dave Young , Vivek Goyal , Eric Biederman Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" Hari Bathini writes: > On 16/07/20 7:19 am, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote: >> >> I didn't forget about this patch. I just wanted to see more of the >> changes before comenting on it. >> >> Hari Bathini writes: >> >>> Some of the kexec_file_load code isn't PPC64 specific. Move PPC64 >>> specific code from kexec/file_load.c to kexec/file_load_64.c. Also, >>> rename purgatory/trampoline.S to purgatory/trampoline_64.S in the >>> same spirit. >> >> There's only a 64 bit implementation of kexec_file_load() so this is a >> somewhat theoretical exercise, but there's no harm in getting the code >> organized, so: >> >> Reviewed-by: Thiago Jung Bauermann >> >> I have just one question below. > > > >>> +/** >>> + * setup_new_fdt_ppc64 - Update the flattend device-tree of the kernel >>> + * being loaded. >>> + * @image: kexec image being loaded. >>> + * @fdt: Flattened device tree for the next kernel. >>> + * @initrd_load_addr: Address where the next initrd will be loaded. >>> + * @initrd_len: Size of the next initrd, or 0 if there will be none. >>> + * @cmdline: Command line for the next kernel, or NULL if there will >>> + * be none. >>> + * >>> + * Returns 0 on success, negative errno on error. >>> + */ >>> +int setup_new_fdt_ppc64(const struct kimage *image, void *fdt, >>> + unsigned long initrd_load_addr, >>> + unsigned long initrd_len, const char *cmdline) >>> +{ >>> + int chosen_node, ret; >>> + >>> + /* Remove memory reservation for the current device tree. */ >>> + ret = delete_fdt_mem_rsv(fdt, __pa(initial_boot_params), >>> + fdt_totalsize(initial_boot_params)); >>> + if (ret == 0) >>> + pr_debug("Removed old device tree reservation.\n"); >>> + else if (ret != -ENOENT) { >>> + pr_err("Failed to remove old device-tree reservation.\n"); >>> + return ret; >>> + } >>> + >>> + ret = setup_new_fdt(image, fdt, initrd_load_addr, initrd_len, >>> + cmdline, &chosen_node); >>> + if (ret) >>> + return ret; >>> + >>> + ret = fdt_setprop(fdt, chosen_node, "linux,booted-from-kexec", NULL, 0); >>> + if (ret) >>> + pr_err("Failed to update device-tree with linux,booted-from-kexec\n"); >>> + >>> + return ret; >>> +} >> >> For setup_purgatory_ppc64() you start with an empty function and build >> from there, but for setup_new_fdt_ppc64() you moved some code here. Is >> the code above 64 bit specific? > > Actually, I was not quiet sure if fdt updates like in patch 6 & patch 9 can be > done after setup_ima_buffer() call. If you can confirm, I will move them back > to setup_purgatory() Hari and I discussed this off-line and we came to the conclusion that theis code can be moved back to setup_new_fdt(). -- Thiago Jung Bauermann IBM Linux Technology Center