All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulienne@suse.de>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: robh+dt@kernel.org, hch@lst.de, ardb@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
	jeremy.linton@arm.com, iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, guohanjun@huawei.com,
	robin.murphy@arm.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Chen Zhou <chenzhou10@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/7] arm64: mm: Move reserve_crashkernel() into mem_init()
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:09:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ba343af12fc60bce36837cc090a39c9e42457788.camel@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201113112901.GA3212@gaia>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3837 bytes --]

Hi Catalin, James,
sorry for the late reply but I got sidetracked.

On Fri, 2020-11-13 at 11:29 +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
[...]
> > > > Let me stress that knowing the DMA constraints in the system before reserving
> > > > crashkernel's regions is necessary if we ever want it to work seamlessly on all
> > > > platforms. Be it small stuff like the Raspberry Pi or huge servers with TB of
> > > > memory.
> > > 
> > > Indeed. So we have 3 options (so far):
> > > 
> > > 1. Allow the crashkernel reservation to go into the linear map but set
> > >    it to invalid once allocated.
> > > 
> > > 2. Parse the flattened DT (not sure what we do with ACPI) before
> > >    creating the linear map. We may have to rely on some SoC ID here
> > >    instead of actual DMA ranges.
> > > 
> > > 3. Assume the smallest ZONE_DMA possible on arm64 (1GB) for crashkernel
> > >    reservations and not rely on arm64_dma_phys_limit in
> > >    reserve_crashkernel().
> > > 
> > > I think (2) we tried hard to avoid. Option (3) brings us back to the
> > > issues we had on large crashkernel reservations regressing on some
> > > platforms (though it's been a while since, they mostly went quiet ;)).
> > > However, with Chen's crashkernel patches we end up with two
> > > reservations, one in the low DMA zone and one higher, potentially above
> > > 4GB. Having a fixed 1GB limit wouldn't be any worse for crashkernel
> > > reservations than what we have now.
> > > 
> > > If (1) works, I'd go for it (James knows this part better than me),
> > > otherwise we can go for (3).
> > 
> > Overall, I'd prefer (1) as well, and I'd be happy to have a got at it. If not
> > I'll append (3) in this series.
> 
> I think for 1 we could also remove the additional KEXEC_CORE checks,
> something like below, untested:
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> index 3e5a6913acc8..27ab609c1c0c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> @@ -477,7 +477,8 @@ static void __init map_mem(pgd_t *pgdp)
>  	int flags = 0;
>  	u64 i;
>  
> -	if (rodata_full || debug_pagealloc_enabled())
> +	if (rodata_full || debug_pagealloc_enabled() ||
> +	    IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE))
>  		flags = NO_BLOCK_MAPPINGS | NO_CONT_MAPPINGS;
>  
>  	/*
> @@ -487,11 +488,6 @@ static void __init map_mem(pgd_t *pgdp)
>  	 * the following for-loop
>  	 */
>  	memblock_mark_nomap(kernel_start, kernel_end - kernel_start);
> -#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE
> -	if (crashk_res.end)
> -		memblock_mark_nomap(crashk_res.start,
> -				    resource_size(&crashk_res));
> -#endif
>  
>  	/* map all the memory banks */
>  	for_each_mem_range(i, &start, &end) {
> @@ -518,21 +514,6 @@ static void __init map_mem(pgd_t *pgdp)
>  	__map_memblock(pgdp, kernel_start, kernel_end,
>  		       PAGE_KERNEL, NO_CONT_MAPPINGS);
>  	memblock_clear_nomap(kernel_start, kernel_end - kernel_start);
> -
> -#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE
> -	/*
> -	 * Use page-level mappings here so that we can shrink the region
> -	 * in page granularity and put back unused memory to buddy system
> -	 * through /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_size interface.
> -	 */
> -	if (crashk_res.end) {
> -		__map_memblock(pgdp, crashk_res.start, crashk_res.end + 1,
> -			       PAGE_KERNEL,
> -			       NO_BLOCK_MAPPINGS | NO_CONT_MAPPINGS);
> -		memblock_clear_nomap(crashk_res.start,
> -				     resource_size(&crashk_res));
> -	}
> -#endif
>  }
>  
>  void mark_rodata_ro(void)

So as far as I'm concerned this is good enough for me. I took the time to
properly test crashkernel on RPi4 using the series, this patch, and another
small fix to properly update /proc/iomem.

I'll send v7 soon, but before, James (or anyone for that matter) any obvious
push-back to Catalin's solution?

Regards,
Nicolas


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulienne@suse.de>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Chen Zhou <chenzhou10@huawei.com>,
	robin.murphy@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	jeremy.linton@arm.com, ardb@kernel.org,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
	linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, guohanjun@huawei.com,
	will@kernel.org, hch@lst.de,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/7] arm64: mm: Move reserve_crashkernel() into mem_init()
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:09:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ba343af12fc60bce36837cc090a39c9e42457788.camel@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201113112901.GA3212@gaia>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3837 bytes --]

Hi Catalin, James,
sorry for the late reply but I got sidetracked.

On Fri, 2020-11-13 at 11:29 +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
[...]
> > > > Let me stress that knowing the DMA constraints in the system before reserving
> > > > crashkernel's regions is necessary if we ever want it to work seamlessly on all
> > > > platforms. Be it small stuff like the Raspberry Pi or huge servers with TB of
> > > > memory.
> > > 
> > > Indeed. So we have 3 options (so far):
> > > 
> > > 1. Allow the crashkernel reservation to go into the linear map but set
> > >    it to invalid once allocated.
> > > 
> > > 2. Parse the flattened DT (not sure what we do with ACPI) before
> > >    creating the linear map. We may have to rely on some SoC ID here
> > >    instead of actual DMA ranges.
> > > 
> > > 3. Assume the smallest ZONE_DMA possible on arm64 (1GB) for crashkernel
> > >    reservations and not rely on arm64_dma_phys_limit in
> > >    reserve_crashkernel().
> > > 
> > > I think (2) we tried hard to avoid. Option (3) brings us back to the
> > > issues we had on large crashkernel reservations regressing on some
> > > platforms (though it's been a while since, they mostly went quiet ;)).
> > > However, with Chen's crashkernel patches we end up with two
> > > reservations, one in the low DMA zone and one higher, potentially above
> > > 4GB. Having a fixed 1GB limit wouldn't be any worse for crashkernel
> > > reservations than what we have now.
> > > 
> > > If (1) works, I'd go for it (James knows this part better than me),
> > > otherwise we can go for (3).
> > 
> > Overall, I'd prefer (1) as well, and I'd be happy to have a got at it. If not
> > I'll append (3) in this series.
> 
> I think for 1 we could also remove the additional KEXEC_CORE checks,
> something like below, untested:
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> index 3e5a6913acc8..27ab609c1c0c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> @@ -477,7 +477,8 @@ static void __init map_mem(pgd_t *pgdp)
>  	int flags = 0;
>  	u64 i;
>  
> -	if (rodata_full || debug_pagealloc_enabled())
> +	if (rodata_full || debug_pagealloc_enabled() ||
> +	    IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE))
>  		flags = NO_BLOCK_MAPPINGS | NO_CONT_MAPPINGS;
>  
>  	/*
> @@ -487,11 +488,6 @@ static void __init map_mem(pgd_t *pgdp)
>  	 * the following for-loop
>  	 */
>  	memblock_mark_nomap(kernel_start, kernel_end - kernel_start);
> -#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE
> -	if (crashk_res.end)
> -		memblock_mark_nomap(crashk_res.start,
> -				    resource_size(&crashk_res));
> -#endif
>  
>  	/* map all the memory banks */
>  	for_each_mem_range(i, &start, &end) {
> @@ -518,21 +514,6 @@ static void __init map_mem(pgd_t *pgdp)
>  	__map_memblock(pgdp, kernel_start, kernel_end,
>  		       PAGE_KERNEL, NO_CONT_MAPPINGS);
>  	memblock_clear_nomap(kernel_start, kernel_end - kernel_start);
> -
> -#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE
> -	/*
> -	 * Use page-level mappings here so that we can shrink the region
> -	 * in page granularity and put back unused memory to buddy system
> -	 * through /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_size interface.
> -	 */
> -	if (crashk_res.end) {
> -		__map_memblock(pgdp, crashk_res.start, crashk_res.end + 1,
> -			       PAGE_KERNEL,
> -			       NO_BLOCK_MAPPINGS | NO_CONT_MAPPINGS);
> -		memblock_clear_nomap(crashk_res.start,
> -				     resource_size(&crashk_res));
> -	}
> -#endif
>  }
>  
>  void mark_rodata_ro(void)

So as far as I'm concerned this is good enough for me. I took the time to
properly test crashkernel on RPi4 using the series, this patch, and another
small fix to properly update /proc/iomem.

I'll send v7 soon, but before, James (or anyone for that matter) any obvious
push-back to Catalin's solution?

Regards,
Nicolas


[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 156 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulienne@suse.de>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com,
	Chen Zhou <chenzhou10@huawei.com>,
	robin.murphy@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	jeremy.linton@arm.com, ardb@kernel.org,
	iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, robh+dt@kernel.org,
	linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, guohanjun@huawei.com,
	will@kernel.org, hch@lst.de,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/7] arm64: mm: Move reserve_crashkernel() into mem_init()
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:09:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ba343af12fc60bce36837cc090a39c9e42457788.camel@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201113112901.GA3212@gaia>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3837 bytes --]

Hi Catalin, James,
sorry for the late reply but I got sidetracked.

On Fri, 2020-11-13 at 11:29 +0000, Catalin Marinas wrote:
[...]
> > > > Let me stress that knowing the DMA constraints in the system before reserving
> > > > crashkernel's regions is necessary if we ever want it to work seamlessly on all
> > > > platforms. Be it small stuff like the Raspberry Pi or huge servers with TB of
> > > > memory.
> > > 
> > > Indeed. So we have 3 options (so far):
> > > 
> > > 1. Allow the crashkernel reservation to go into the linear map but set
> > >    it to invalid once allocated.
> > > 
> > > 2. Parse the flattened DT (not sure what we do with ACPI) before
> > >    creating the linear map. We may have to rely on some SoC ID here
> > >    instead of actual DMA ranges.
> > > 
> > > 3. Assume the smallest ZONE_DMA possible on arm64 (1GB) for crashkernel
> > >    reservations and not rely on arm64_dma_phys_limit in
> > >    reserve_crashkernel().
> > > 
> > > I think (2) we tried hard to avoid. Option (3) brings us back to the
> > > issues we had on large crashkernel reservations regressing on some
> > > platforms (though it's been a while since, they mostly went quiet ;)).
> > > However, with Chen's crashkernel patches we end up with two
> > > reservations, one in the low DMA zone and one higher, potentially above
> > > 4GB. Having a fixed 1GB limit wouldn't be any worse for crashkernel
> > > reservations than what we have now.
> > > 
> > > If (1) works, I'd go for it (James knows this part better than me),
> > > otherwise we can go for (3).
> > 
> > Overall, I'd prefer (1) as well, and I'd be happy to have a got at it. If not
> > I'll append (3) in this series.
> 
> I think for 1 we could also remove the additional KEXEC_CORE checks,
> something like below, untested:
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> index 3e5a6913acc8..27ab609c1c0c 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c
> @@ -477,7 +477,8 @@ static void __init map_mem(pgd_t *pgdp)
>  	int flags = 0;
>  	u64 i;
>  
> -	if (rodata_full || debug_pagealloc_enabled())
> +	if (rodata_full || debug_pagealloc_enabled() ||
> +	    IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE))
>  		flags = NO_BLOCK_MAPPINGS | NO_CONT_MAPPINGS;
>  
>  	/*
> @@ -487,11 +488,6 @@ static void __init map_mem(pgd_t *pgdp)
>  	 * the following for-loop
>  	 */
>  	memblock_mark_nomap(kernel_start, kernel_end - kernel_start);
> -#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE
> -	if (crashk_res.end)
> -		memblock_mark_nomap(crashk_res.start,
> -				    resource_size(&crashk_res));
> -#endif
>  
>  	/* map all the memory banks */
>  	for_each_mem_range(i, &start, &end) {
> @@ -518,21 +514,6 @@ static void __init map_mem(pgd_t *pgdp)
>  	__map_memblock(pgdp, kernel_start, kernel_end,
>  		       PAGE_KERNEL, NO_CONT_MAPPINGS);
>  	memblock_clear_nomap(kernel_start, kernel_end - kernel_start);
> -
> -#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE
> -	/*
> -	 * Use page-level mappings here so that we can shrink the region
> -	 * in page granularity and put back unused memory to buddy system
> -	 * through /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_size interface.
> -	 */
> -	if (crashk_res.end) {
> -		__map_memblock(pgdp, crashk_res.start, crashk_res.end + 1,
> -			       PAGE_KERNEL,
> -			       NO_BLOCK_MAPPINGS | NO_CONT_MAPPINGS);
> -		memblock_clear_nomap(crashk_res.start,
> -				     resource_size(&crashk_res));
> -	}
> -#endif
>  }
>  
>  void mark_rodata_ro(void)

So as far as I'm concerned this is good enough for me. I took the time to
properly test crashkernel on RPi4 using the series, this patch, and another
small fix to properly update /proc/iomem.

I'll send v7 soon, but before, James (or anyone for that matter) any obvious
push-back to Catalin's solution?

Regards,
Nicolas


[-- Attachment #1.2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2020-11-19 14:10 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-11-03 17:31 [PATCH v6 0/7] arm64: Default to 32-bit wide ZONE_DMA Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31 ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31 ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31 ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31 ` [PATCH v6 1/7] arm64: mm: Move reserve_crashkernel() into mem_init() Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-05 16:11   ` James Morse
2020-11-05 16:11     ` James Morse
2020-11-05 16:11     ` James Morse
2020-11-06 18:46     ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-06 18:46       ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-06 18:46       ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-10 18:17       ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-10 18:17         ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-10 18:17         ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-12 15:56         ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-12 15:56           ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-12 15:56           ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-13 11:29           ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-13 11:29             ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-13 11:29             ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-19 14:09             ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne [this message]
2020-11-19 14:09               ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-19 14:09               ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-19 17:10               ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-19 17:10                 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-19 17:10                 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-19 17:25                 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-19 17:25                   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-19 17:25                   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-19 17:25                 ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-19 17:25                   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-19 17:25                   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-19 17:45                   ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-19 17:45                     ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-19 17:45                     ` Catalin Marinas
2020-11-19 18:18       ` James Morse
2020-11-19 18:18         ` James Morse
2020-11-19 18:18         ` James Morse
2020-11-03 17:31 ` [PATCH v6 2/7] arm64: mm: Move zone_dma_bits initialization into zone_sizes_init() Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31 ` [PATCH v6 3/7] of/address: Introduce of_dma_get_max_cpu_address() Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31 ` [PATCH v6 4/7] of: unittest: Add test for of_dma_get_max_cpu_address() Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31 ` [PATCH v6 5/7] arm64: mm: Set ZONE_DMA size based on devicetree's dma-ranges Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31 ` [PATCH v6 6/7] arm64: mm: Set ZONE_DMA size based on early IORT scan Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31 ` [PATCH v6 7/7] mm: Remove examples from enum zone_type comment Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne
2020-11-03 17:31   ` Nicolas Saenz Julienne

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=ba343af12fc60bce36837cc090a39c9e42457788.camel@suse.de \
    --to=nsaenzjulienne@suse.de \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=chenzhou10@huawei.com \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=jeremy.linton@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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.