linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: dyoung@redhat.com (Dave Young)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v24 5/9] arm64: kdump: add kdump support
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 16:04:43 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160824080443.GA12902@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160823112343.GC13501@localhost.localdomain>

Ccing uefi people.

On 08/23/16 at 04:53pm, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> On 23/08/2016:09:38:16 AM, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 02:47:30PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> > > On 22/08/16 02:29, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 04:52:17PM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> > > >> It will help kexec-tools to prevent copying  of any unnecessary data. I
> > > >> think, then you also need to change phys_offset calculation in kexec-tools. That
> > > >> should be start of either of first "reserved" or "System RAM" block.
> > > > 
> > > > Good point, but I'm not sure this is always true.
> > > 
> > > > Is there any system whose ACPI memory is *not* part of DRAM
> > > 
> > > From the spec, it looks like this is allowed.
> > > 
> > > What do you mean by 'DRAM'? Any ACPI region will be in the UEFI memory map, so
> > > the question is what is its type and memory attributes?
> > 
> > Yes.
> > 
> > > The UEFI spec[0] says ACPI regions can have a type of EfiACPIReclaimMemory or
> > > EfiACPIMemoryNVS, the memory attributes aren't specified, so are chosen by the
> > > firmware.
> > > 
> > > It is possible these regions have to be mapped non-cacheable, page 40 has a
> > > couple of:
> > > > If no information about the table location exists in the UEFI memory map or
> > > ACPI memory
> > > > descriptors, the table is assumed to be non-cached.
> > > 
> > > reserve_regions() in drivers/firmware/efi/arm-init.c will add any entry in the
> > > memory map that has a 'WB' attribute to the memblock.memory list (via
> > > early_init_dt_add_memory_arch()), it will also mark as no-map regions that have
> > > this attribute and aren't in the is_reserve_region() list.

Looking the arm-init.c, I suspect it missed the some efi ranges as
reserved ranges like runtime code and runtime data etc. But I might be
wrong.

Below is the is_reserve_region, it will regard any regions which is not
in the EFI_* below as normal memory, it does not include the runtime
ranges and other types.

static __init int is_reserve_region(efi_memory_desc_t *md)
{
        switch (md->type) {
        case EFI_LOADER_CODE:
        case EFI_LOADER_DATA:
        case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE:
        case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA:
        case EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY:
        case EFI_PERSISTENT_MEMORY:
                return 0;
        default:
                break;
        }
        return is_normal_ram(md);
}

Let's see the x86 do_add_efi_mem_map, the default case set all other
types as reserved. Shouldn't this be same in all arches though there's
no e820 in arm(64)?

static void __init do_add_efi_memmap(void)
{

[snip]
                switch (md->type) {
                case EFI_LOADER_CODE:
                case EFI_LOADER_DATA:
                case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE:
                case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA:
                case EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY:
                        if (md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_WB)
                                e820_type = E820_RAM;
                        else
                                e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
                        break;
[snip]
                default:
                        /*
                         * EFI_RESERVED_TYPE EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE
                         * EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA
                         * EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO
                         * EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO_PORT_SPACE EFI_PAL_CODE
                         */
                        e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
                        break;
                }
[snip]
}

> > > 
> > > If these ACPI regions have the 'WB' attribute, we add them as memory and mark
> > > them nomap. These show up as either a hole, or 'reserved' in /proc/iomem.
> > > If they don't have the 'WB' attribute, then then they are left out of memblock
> > > and aren't part of DRAM, I don't think these will show up in /proc/iomem at all.
> > 
> > Let's say,
> > 0x1000-0x1fff: reserved (SRAM for UEFI, WB)
> > 0x80000000-0xffffffff: System RAM (DRAM)
> 
> May be slightly more complicated:
> 0x80000000-0x80001fff: System RAM (DRAM) for UEFI, WB
> 0x80002000-0xffffffff: System RAM (DRAM)
> 
> Kernel will have phys_offset 0x80000000, however kexec-tools will calculate it
> as 0x80002000.
> 
> > 
> > If, as Pratyush suggested, "reserved" resources are added to phys_offset
> > calculation, the kernel linear mapping area starts at PAGE_OFFSET, but
> > there is no actual mapping around PAGE_OFFSET.
> > It won't hurt anything, but looks funny.
> > So we'd better not include "reserved" in phys_offset calculation anyway.
> >         -> Pratyush
> 
> My only concern is that, then we will have different values of phys_offset in
> kernel and kexec-tools, which might lead to further confusion.
> 
> ~Pratyush

  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-24  8:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-09  1:52 [PATCH v24 0/9] arm64: add kdump support AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09  1:52 ` [PATCH v24 1/9] arm64: kdump: reserve memory for crash dump kernel AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09  1:55   ` [PATCH v24 2/9] memblock: add memblock_cap_memory_range() AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-10 16:26     ` James Morse
2016-08-09  1:56   ` [PATCH v24 3/9] arm64: limit memory regions based on DT property, usable-memory-range AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09  1:56     ` [PATCH v24 4/9] arm64: kdump: implement machine_crash_shutdown() AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09  1:56     ` [PATCH v24 5/9] arm64: kdump: add kdump support AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-10 16:38       ` James Morse
2016-08-10 18:18         ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-11 10:03           ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-16 10:13             ` James Morse
2016-08-17 15:33               ` [PATCH] fixup! " James Morse
2016-08-18  7:32                 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-19  8:00                 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-19 13:34                   ` James Morse
2016-08-19 15:19                     ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-18  7:15         ` [PATCH v24 5/9] " AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-18  7:19           ` Dave Young
2016-08-19  1:26           ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-19 11:22             ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-22  1:29               ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-22  7:07                 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-22 13:47                 ` James Morse
2016-08-23  0:38                   ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-23 11:23                     ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-24  8:04                       ` Dave Young [this message]
2016-08-24 10:25                         ` James Morse
2016-08-25  1:04                           ` Dave Young
2016-08-19 13:28             ` James Morse
2016-08-22  1:23               ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-24 14:44       ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-08-26  6:22         ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09  1:56     ` [PATCH v24 6/9] arm64: kdump: add VMCOREINFO's for user-space coredump tools AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09  1:56     ` [PATCH v24 7/9] arm64: kdump: enable kdump in the arm64 defconfig AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09  1:56     ` [PATCH v24 8/9] arm64: kdump: update a kernel doc AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09  1:57   ` [PATCH v24 9/9] Documentation: dt: chosen properties for arm64 kdump AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-19 13:26     ` Rob Herring
2016-08-22  4:28       ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-30 16:34         ` Rob Herring
2016-08-30 23:45           ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-31  5:02             ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-02 10:11               ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-27 23:39       ` Mark Rutland
2016-08-09  2:04 ` [PATCH v24 0/9] arm64: add kdump support AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-31  3:41 ` Manish Jaggi
2016-08-31  5:31   ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-02 12:53     ` Manish Jaggi
2016-09-05  8:15       ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-05 12:42         ` Manish Jaggi
2016-09-06 15:33           ` Marc Zyngier
2016-09-06 16:15             ` Manish Jaggi
2016-09-06 16:42               ` Marc Zyngier

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=20160824080443.GA12902@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com \
    --to=dyoung@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).