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=-7.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT 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 EA633C282C4 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:47:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (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 B6CD820863 for ; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:47:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="grMyKFHe" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B6CD820863 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=o2ngIJBPAkGwmVcHfw/cnIaTgZMfWAuNz4mYQrdlxlM=; b=grMyKFHee1qmRM QScsO8kTnPwy4UWkMmK57a3qHWAcMOxQkd+fka/rzhsdpuMZ/RqJQcokCjWryBNdofjBJPi9Ry7hJ pdC4i9w9XC6Z9rr/odRzEbuvT8jmgtVjcmCysb9vXNWQ+25AKSM2DWzVIqSQUZh83CffzkvwU2W7a ZgLqhPAFLHZ7Q96uWykeEVIIB2QbhHZpN8hHVPW9zKzVZ7ZwaEChLnL2IrJ2kVOt5fl65TvOQXA16 gUWcVQppDuY9DJYzemHfYJpke+AuVO++MdtSaYaBwrm/r1frHYKEGluBbmOGtyTwrWIsk2/4RyoT4 spMZCzYF/8hWWu7C8wXQ==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gtVau-0007Kf-Rg; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:47:16 +0000 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gtVYB-0003cS-K2; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:45:39 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A16AC057F8F; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:44:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com (ovpn-12-31.pek2.redhat.com [10.72.12.31]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A20AC600C6; Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2019 18:44:07 +0800 From: Dave Young To: Bhupesh Sharma Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64, vmcoreinfo : Append 'MAX_USER_VA_BITS' and 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' to vmcoreinfo Message-ID: <20190212104407.GA17022@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> References: <1548850991-11879-1-git-send-email-bhsharma@redhat.com> <20190131014800.GB15785@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> <4AE2DC15AC0B8543882A74EA0D43DBEC03567AA3@BPXM09GP.gisp.nec.co.jp> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.5 (2018-04-13) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.32]); Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:44:25 +0000 (UTC) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190212_024429_563839_2740C9F5 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 31.47 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , Kazuhito Hagio , "lijiang@redhat.com" , "bhe@redhat.com" , "ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org" , "catalin.marinas@arm.com" , "kexec@lists.infradead.org" , Will Deacon , AKASHI Takahiro , James Morse , Borislav Petkov , "anderson@redhat.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 02/12/19 at 10:37am, Bhupesh Sharma wrote: > Hi Kazu, > > On 02/04/2019 09:34 PM, Kazuhito Hagio wrote: > > On 1/30/2019 8:48 PM, Dave Young wrote: > > > + more people > > > On 01/30/19 at 05:53pm, Bhupesh Sharma wrote: > > > > With ARMv8.2-LVA and LPA architecture extensions, arm64 hardware which > > > > supports these extensions can support upto 52-bit virtual and 52-bit > > > > physical addresses respectively. > > > > > > > > Since at the moment we enable the support of these extensions via CONFIG > > > > flags, e.g. > > > > - LPA via CONFIG_ARM64_PA_BITS_52 > > > > > > > > there are no clear mechanisms in user-space right now to > > > > deteremine these CONFIG flag values and also determine the PARange and > > > > VARange address values. > > > > > > > > User-space tools like 'makedumpfile' and 'crash-utility' can instead > > > > use the 'MAX_USER_VA_BITS' and 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' values to determine > > > > the maximum virtual address and physical address (respectively) > > > > supported by underlying kernel. > > > > > > > > A reference 'makedumpfile' implementation which uses this approach to > > > > determining the maximum physical address is available in [0]. > > > > > > > > [0]. > > > https://github.com/bhupesh-sharma/makedumpfile/blob/52-bit-pa-support-via-vmcore-v1/arch/arm64.c#L490 > > > > > > I'm not objecting the patch, just want to make sure to make clear about > > > things and make sure these issues are aware by people, and leave arm > > > people to review the arm bits. > > > > > > 1. MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS > > > As we previously found, back to 2014 makedumpfile took a patch to read the > > > value from vmcore but the kernel patch was not accepted. > > > So we should first make clear if this is really needed, why other arches > > > do not need this in makedumpfile. > > > > > > If we really need it then should it be arm64 only? > > > > > > If it is arm64 only then the makedumpfile code should read this number > > > only for arm64. > > > > Sorry for the delay. > > > > According to the kernel patch, some of arm32 platforms may need it > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2014-May/011909.html > > but except for them (and arm64), makedumpfile can manage with kernel > > version and some switches to determine this value so far. > > > > > > > > Also Lianbo added the vmcoreinfo documents, I believe it stays in -tip > > > tree, need to make sure to document this as well. > > > > > > 2. MAX_USER_VA_BITS > > > Does makedumpfile care about userspace VA bits? I do not see other code > > > doing this, Kazu and Dave A should be able to comment. > > > > The mapping makedumpfile uses on arm64 is swapper_pg_dir only, so > > unless the config affects its structure or something, makedumpfile > > will not need this value. > > I captured this case in more details while sending out the makedumpfile > enablement patch for ARMv8.2-LVA (see [0]), but here is a brief summary on > the same: > > Since at the moment we enable the support of the ARMv8.2-LVA extension for > 52-bit user-space VA in the kernel via a CONFIG flags > (CONFIG_ARM64_USER_VA_BITS_52), so there are no clear mechanisms in > user-space to determine this CONFIG > flag value and use it to determine the address range values. > > Since 'VA_BITS' are already exported via vmcoreinfo, if we export > 'MAX_USER_VA_BITS' as well, we can use the same in user-space to check if > the 'MAX_USER_VA_BITS' value is greater than 'VA_BITS'. If yes, then we are > running a use-case where user-space is 52-bit while the underlying kernel is > still 48-bit. Problem is why this is needed, it sounds like you are talking about some non-exist use case. > > The increased 'PTRS_PER_PGD' value for such cases needs to be then > calculated as is done by the underlying kernel (see > 'arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h' for details): > > #define PTRS_PER_PGD (1 << (MAX_USER_VA_BITS - PGDIR_SHIFT)) > > Also, note that 'arch/arm64/include/asm/memory.h' defines 'MAX_USER_VA_BITS' > as 'VA_BITS' in case 'CONFIG_ARM64_USER_VA_BITS_52' is set to 'n': > > #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_USER_VA_BITS_52 > #define MAX_USER_VA_BITS 52 > #else > #define MAX_USER_VA_BITS VA_BITS > #endif > > So, makedumpfile will need this symbol exported in vmcore to make the above > determination. > > [0]. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-February/022425.html > > Thanks, > Bhupesh Thanks Dave _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel