Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Kazuhito Hagio <k-hagio@ab.jp.nec.com>
To: Dave Anderson <anderson@redhat.com>,
	Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@redhat.com>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	"lijiang@redhat.com" <lijiang@redhat.com>,
	"bhe@redhat.com" <bhe@redhat.com>,
	Steve Capper <Steve.Capper@arm.com>,
	catalin marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	ard biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	"kexec@lists.infradead.org" <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Kristina Martsenko <kristina.martsenko@arm.com>,
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] arm64, vmcoreinfo : Append 'MAX_USER_VA_BITS' and 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' to vmcoreinfo
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2019 19:02:58 +0000
Message-ID: <4AE2DC15AC0B8543882A74EA0D43DBEC03568CA1@BPXM09GP.gisp.nec.co.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1481013752.3226345.1550767349644.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>

-----Original Message-----
> ----- Original Message -----
> > Hi Kazu,
> >
> > On 02/20/2019 02:17 AM, Kazuhito Hagio wrote:
> > > Hi Bhupesh,
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > >> I am not sure you got a chance to look at the two regression cases I
> > >> reported here:
> > >> <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-February/022449.html>
> > >>
> > >> Unfortunately the above suggestion doesn't provide any fix for
> > >> ARMv8.2-LPA regression (see text under heading '
> > >> (1). Regression Case 1 (ARMv8.2-LPA enabled kernel)')
> > >
> > > As for MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS, I realized that ppc64 makedumpfile can detect
> > > it because there is only one SECTION_SIZE_BITS for ppc64. I think we
> > > can use the same way as set_ppc64_max_physmem_bits() does also for
> > > arm64 for now. I'm going to write it for kernels not having
> > > NUMBER(MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS) in vmcoreinfo.
> >
> > I see two drawbacks with the above approach:
> >
> > a). This means that other user-space tools like crash-utility would
> > still be broken and would probably need to find MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS for
> > arm64 via a similar (hack'ish ?) approach.
> >
> > b). I am looking at the makedumpfile code for 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS'
> > determination for two archs as an example:
> >
> > ppc
> > ---
> >
> > int
> > set_ppc64_max_physmem_bits(void)
> > {
> >          long array_len = ARRAY_LENGTH(mem_section);
> >          /*
> >           * The older ppc64 kernels uses _MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS as 42 and the
> >           * newer kernels 3.7 onwards uses 46 bits.
> >           */
> >
> >          info->max_physmem_bits  = _MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS_ORIG ;
> >          if ((array_len == (NR_MEM_SECTIONS() / _SECTIONS_PER_ROOT_EXTREME()))
> >                  || (array_len == (NR_MEM_SECTIONS() / _SECTIONS_PER_ROOT())))
> >                  return TRUE;
> >
> >          info->max_physmem_bits  = _MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS_3_7;
> >          if ((array_len == (NR_MEM_SECTIONS() / _SECTIONS_PER_ROOT_EXTREME()))
> >                  || (array_len == (NR_MEM_SECTIONS() / _SECTIONS_PER_ROOT())))
> >                  return TRUE;
> >
> >          info->max_physmem_bits  = _MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS_4_19;
> >          if ((array_len == (NR_MEM_SECTIONS() / _SECTIONS_PER_ROOT_EXTREME()))
> >                  || (array_len == (NR_MEM_SECTIONS() / _SECTIONS_PER_ROOT())))
> >                  return TRUE;
> >
> >          info->max_physmem_bits  = _MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS_4_20;
> >          if ((array_len == (NR_MEM_SECTIONS() / _SECTIONS_PER_ROOT_EXTREME()))
> >                  || (array_len == (NR_MEM_SECTIONS() /  _SECTIONS_PER_ROOT())))
> >                  return TRUE;
> >
> >          return FALSE;
> > }
> >
> > x86_64:
> > ------
> >
> > int
> > get_versiondep_info_x86_64(void)
> > {
> >      /*
> >       * On linux-2.6.26, MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS is changed to 44 from 40.
> >       */
> >      if (info->kernel_version < KERNEL_VERSION(2, 6, 26))
> >          info->max_physmem_bits  = _MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS_ORIG;
> >      else if (info->kernel_version < KERNEL_VERSION(2, 6, 31))
> >          info->max_physmem_bits  = _MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS_2_6_26;
> >      else if(check_5level_paging())
> >          info->max_physmem_bits  = _MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS_5LEVEL;
> >      else
> >          info->max_physmem_bits  = _MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS_2_6_31;
> >
> >      ...
> > }
> >
> > Looking at the above, two questions come to my mind:
> >
> > - Do we really need all the above complexity in user-space code, to hoop
> > across various kernel versions and perform allocations for something
> > that can be so easily exported via vmcoreinfo? Also we need to see how
> > portable is the above code for a new kernel version - IMO, it will need
> > another fix patch when we update to a new kernel version in near future.
> 
> I agree -- not to mention that the "kernel version" way of determining things
> does not account for distribution-specific backports.
> 
> >
> > - Also do we need to replicate the above implementations across
> > user-space tools when they can also utilize the vmcoreinfo information
> > to determine the PA_BITS range without any additional arch/kernel
> > version specific details as the single point of obtaining this
> > information from the kernel?
> >
> > So, in view of the above, I would still advocate that we use a
> > vmcoreinfo export for 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' as well to have a uniform
> > interface for the same across all user-land applications.
> 
> Again, totally agree.

I also agree that we should do so. Then it will be better to have
it in kernel core code, not in arch-specific code.

Although makedumpfile may have to have the kludge for kernels that
support 52-bit PA and don't have the exported MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS
sooner or later..

Thanks,
Kazu


> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> > Thanks,
> > Bhupesh
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kexec mailing list
> kexec@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec



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

  reply index

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-01-30 12:23 Bhupesh Sharma
2019-01-30 15:21 ` James Morse
2019-01-30 21:39   ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-02-04 14:35     ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-02-04 15:31       ` Robin Murphy
2019-02-12  4:55         ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-02-12 10:49           ` Robin Murphy
2019-02-04 16:56       ` James Morse
2019-01-31  1:48 ` Dave Young
2019-01-31 10:00   ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-01-31 14:03   ` Dave Anderson
2019-02-04 16:04   ` Kazuhito Hagio
2019-02-12  5:07     ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-02-12 10:44       ` Dave Young
2019-02-12 19:59         ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-02-12 23:03           ` Kazuhito Hagio
2019-02-13 11:15             ` Dave Young
2019-02-13 18:22               ` James Morse
2019-02-13 19:52                 ` Kazuhito Hagio
2019-02-15 17:34                   ` James Morse
2019-02-15 18:01                     ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-02-18 15:27                       ` Steve Capper
2019-02-21 16:08                         ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-02-19 20:47                       ` Kazuhito Hagio
2019-02-21 16:20                         ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-02-21 16:42                           ` Dave Anderson
2019-02-21 19:02                             ` Kazuhito Hagio [this message]
2019-03-01  4:01                               ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-02-14 19:30                 ` Bhupesh Sharma

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=4AE2DC15AC0B8543882A74EA0D43DBEC03568CA1@BPXM09GP.gisp.nec.co.jp \
    --to=k-hagio@ab.jp.nec.com \
    --cc=Steve.Capper@arm.com \
    --cc=anderson@redhat.com \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=bhe@redhat.com \
    --cc=bhsharma@redhat.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=kristina.martsenko@arm.com \
    --cc=lijiang@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /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

Linux-ARM-Kernel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/0 linux-arm-kernel/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/1 linux-arm-kernel/git/1.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 linux-arm-kernel linux-arm-kernel/ https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel \
		linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org infradead-linux-arm-kernel@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index linux-arm-kernel


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.infradead.lists.linux-arm-kernel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox