From: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT PATCH 1/5] s390: make crashk_res resource a child of "System RAM"
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 15:18:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210601151836.1f3a90e0@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210531122959.23499-2-rppt@kernel.org>
On Mon, 31 May 2021 15:29:55 +0300
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org> wrote:
> From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
>
> Commit 4e042af463f8 ("s390/kexec: fix crash on resize of reserved memory")
> added a comment that says "crash kernel resource should not be part of the
> System RAM resource" but never explained why. As it looks from the code in
> the kernel and in kexec there is no actual reason for that.
Still testing, but so far everything works fine.
>
> Keeping crashk_res inline with other resources makes code simpler and
> cleaner, and allows future consolidation of the resources setup across
> several architectures.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/s390/kernel/setup.c | 21 +++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kernel/setup.c b/arch/s390/kernel/setup.c
> index 5aab59ad5688..30430e7c1b03 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -500,6 +500,9 @@ static struct resource __initdata *standard_resources[] = {
> &code_resource,
> &data_resource,
> &bss_resource,
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP
> + &crashk_res,
> +#endif
> };
>
> static void __init setup_resources(void)
> @@ -535,7 +538,7 @@ static void __init setup_resources(void)
>
> for (j = 0; j < ARRAY_SIZE(standard_resources); j++) {
> std_res = standard_resources[j];
> - if (std_res->start < res->start ||
> + if (!std_res->end || std_res->start < res->start ||
> std_res->start > res->end)
> continue;
> if (std_res->end > res->end) {
Why is this extra check for !std_res->end added here? I assume it
might be needed later, after you moved this to common code, but I
cannot see how any of the other patches in this series would require
that.
> @@ -552,20 +555,6 @@ static void __init setup_resources(void)
> }
> }
> }
> -#ifdef CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP
> - /*
> - * Re-add removed crash kernel memory as reserved memory. This makes
> - * sure it will be mapped with the identity mapping and struct pages
> - * will be created, so it can be resized later on.
> - * However add it later since the crash kernel resource should not be
> - * part of the System RAM resource.
> - */
> - if (crashk_res.end) {
> - memblock_add_node(crashk_res.start, resource_size(&crashk_res), 0);
> - memblock_reserve(crashk_res.start, resource_size(&crashk_res));
> - insert_resource(&iomem_resource, &crashk_res);
> - }
> -#endif
> }
>
> static void __init setup_ident_map_size(void)
> @@ -733,7 +722,7 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
> diag10_range(PFN_DOWN(crash_base), PFN_DOWN(crash_size));
> crashk_res.start = crash_base;
> crashk_res.end = crash_base + crash_size - 1;
> - memblock_remove(crash_base, crash_size);
> + memblock_reserve(crash_base, crash_size);
> pr_info("Reserving %lluMB of memory at %lluMB "
> "for crashkernel (System RAM: %luMB)\n",
> crash_size >> 20, crash_base >> 20,
Other architectures check the return value of memblock_reserve() at
this point, and exit crashkernel reservation if it fails. IIUC, the
only reason why memblock_reserve() could fail would be the same reason
why also memblock_remove() could fail, i.e. that memblock_double_array()
would fail. And since we also do not check that at the moment, your
patch would probably not (additionally) break anything.
Still, this might be something for an add-on patch (for us). Do you
happen to know how likely it would be that memblock_remove/reserve()
could fail at this point?
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-01 13:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-31 12:29 [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/5] consolidate "System RAM" resources setup Mike Rapoport
2021-05-31 12:29 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 1/5] s390: make crashk_res resource a child of "System RAM" Mike Rapoport
2021-06-01 8:45 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-06-01 9:02 ` David Hildenbrand
2021-06-02 6:25 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-06-01 13:18 ` Gerald Schaefer [this message]
2021-06-02 6:54 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-31 12:29 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 2/5] memblock: introduce generic memblock_setup_resources() Mike Rapoport
2021-06-01 13:54 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2021-06-02 8:33 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-06-02 10:15 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2021-06-02 13:54 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-06-02 15:51 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2021-06-02 18:43 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-06-02 20:15 ` Russell King (Oracle)
2021-06-03 10:32 ` Mike Rapoport
2021-05-31 12:29 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 3/5] arm: switch to " Mike Rapoport
2021-05-31 12:29 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 4/5] MIPS: switch to generic memblock_setup_resources Mike Rapoport
2021-05-31 12:29 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 5/5] arm64: switch to generic memblock_setup_resources() Mike Rapoport
2021-06-01 13:44 ` [RFC/RFT PATCH 0/5] consolidate "System RAM" resources setup Russell King (Oracle)
2021-06-02 7:05 ` Mike Rapoport
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=20210601151836.1f3a90e0@thinkpad \
--to=gerald.schaefer@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tsbogend@alpha.franken.de \
--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 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).