From: John Donnelly <john.p.donnelly@oracle.com>
To: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
Cc: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Chen Zhou <chenzhou10@huawei.com>,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, bhsharma@redhat.com,
xiexiuqi@huawei.com, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
horms@verge.net.au, tglx@linutronix.de, will@kernel.org,
mingo@redhat.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] x86: kdump: move reserve_crashkernel_low() into crash_core.c
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 09:25:09 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <73F5F438-0B79-418D-8AA7-B1164D10AA24@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <08C19FFB-C6FC-4BB7-A1C2-67CE6B99D2AB@oracle.com>
> On Jan 16, 2020, at 9:47 AM, John Donnelly <john.p.donnelly@oracle.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Jan 16, 2020, at 9:17 AM, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> On 28/12/2019 09:32, Dave Young wrote:
>>> On 12/27/19 at 07:04pm, Chen Zhou wrote:
>>>> On 2019/12/27 13:54, Dave Young wrote:
>>>>> On 12/23/19 at 11:23pm, Chen Zhou wrote:
>>>>>> In preparation for supporting reserve_crashkernel_low in arm64 as
>>>>>> x86_64 does, move reserve_crashkernel_low() into kernel/crash_core.c.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note, in arm64, we reserve low memory if and only if crashkernel=X,low
>>>>>> is specified. Different with x86_64, don't set low memory automatically.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you have any reason for the difference? I'd expect we have same
>>>>> logic if possible and remove some of the ifdefs.
>>>>
>>>> In x86_64, if we reserve crashkernel above 4G, then we call reserve_crashkernel_low()
>>>> to reserve low memory.
>>>>
>>>> In arm64, to simplify, we call reserve_crashkernel_low() at the beginning of reserve_crashkernel()
>>>> and then relax the arm64_dma32_phys_limit if reserve_crashkernel_low() allocated something.
>>>> In this case, if reserve crashkernel below 4G there will be 256M low memory set automatically
>>>> and this needs extra considerations.
>>
>>> Sorry that I did not read the old thread details and thought that is
>>> arch dependent. But rethink about that, it would be better that we can
>>> have same semantic about crashkernel parameters across arches. If we
>>> make them different then it causes confusion, especially for
>>> distributions.
>>
>> Surely distros also want one crashkernel* string they can use on all platforms without
>> having to detect the kernel version, platform or changeable memory layout...
>>
>>
>>> OTOH, I thought if we reserve high memory then the low memory should be
>>> needed. There might be some exceptions, but I do not know the exact
>>> one,
>>
>>> can we make the behavior same, and special case those systems which
>>> do not need low memory reservation.
>>
>> Its tricky to work out which systems are the 'normal' ones.
>>
>> We don't have a fixed memory layout for arm64. Some systems have no memory below 4G.
>> Others have no memory above 4G.
>>
>> Chen Zhou's machine has some memory below 4G, but its too precious to reserve a large
>> chunk for kdump. Without any memory below 4G some of the drivers won't work.
>>
>> I don't see what distros can set as their default for all platforms if high/low are
>> mutually exclusive with the 'crashkernel=' in use today. How did x86 navigate this, ... or
>> was it so long ago?
>>
>> No one else has reported a problem with the existing placement logic, hence treating this
>> 'low' thing as the 'in addition' special case.
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I am seeing similar Arm crash dump issues on 5.4 kernels where we need rather large amount of crashkernel memory reserved that is not available below 4GB ( The maximum reserved size appears to be around 768M ) . When I pick memory range higher than 4GB , I see adapters that fail to initialize :
>
>
> There is no low-memory <4G memory for DMA ;
>
> [ 11.506792] kworker/0:14: page allocation failure: order:0,
> mode:0x104(GFP_DMA32|__GFP_ZERO), nodemask=(null),cpuset=/,mems_allowed=0
> [ 11.518793] CPU: 0 PID: 150 Comm: kworker/0:14 Not tainted
> 5.4.0-1948.3.el8uek.aarch64 #1
> [ 11.526955] Hardware name: To be filled by O.E.M. Saber/Saber, BIOS
> 0ACKL025 01/18/2019
> [ 11.534948] Workqueue: events work_for_cpu_fn
> [ 11.539291] Call trace:
> [ 11.541727] dump_backtrace+0x0/0x18c
> [ 11.545376] show_stack+0x24/0x30
> [ 11.548679] dump_stack+0xbc/0xe0
> [ 11.551982] warn_alloc+0xf0/0x15c
> [ 11.555370] __alloc_pages_slowpath+0xb4c/0xb84
> [ 11.559887] __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x2d0/0x330
> [ 11.564405] alloc_pages_current+0x8c/0xf8
> [ 11.568496] ttm_bo_device_init+0x188/0x220 [ttm]
> [ 11.573187] drm_vram_mm_init+0x58/0x80 [drm_vram_helper]
> [ 11.578572] drm_vram_helper_alloc_mm+0x64/0xb0 [drm_vram_helper]
> [ 11.584655] ast_mm_init+0x38/0x80 [ast]
> [ 11.588566] ast_driver_load+0x474/0xa70 [ast]
> [ 11.593029] drm_dev_register+0x144/0x1c8 [drm]
> [ 11.597573] drm_get_pci_dev+0xa4/0x168 [drm]
> [ 11.601919] ast_pci_probe+0x8c/0x9c [ast]
> [ 11.606004] local_pci_probe+0x44/0x98
> [ 11.609739] work_for_cpu_fn+0x20/0x30
> [ 11.613474] process_one_work+0x1c4/0x41c
> [ 11.617470] worker_thread+0x150/0x4b0
> [ 11.621206] kthread+0x110/0x114
> [ 11.624422] ret_from_fork+0x10/0x18
>
> This failure is related to a graphics adapter.
>
> The more complex kdump configurations that use networking stack to NFS mount a filesystem to dump to , or use ssh to copy to another machine, require more crashkernel memory reservations than perhaps the “default*” settings of a minimal kdump that creates a minimal vmcore to local storage in /var/crash. If crashkernel is too small I get Out of Memory issues and the entire vmcore process fails.
>
> ( *default kdump setting I assume are a minimal vmcore to /var/crash using primary boot device where /root is located )
>
Hi Chen,
I was able to unit test these series of kernel patches applied to a 5.4.17 test kernel along with the kexec CLI change :
0001-arm64-kdump-add-another-DT-property-to-crash-dump-ke.patch
Applied to :
kexec-tools-2.0.19-12.0.4.el8.src.rpm
And obtained a vmcore using this cmdline :
BOOT_IMAGE=(hd6,gpt2)/vmlinuz-5.4.17-4-uek6m_ol8-jpdonnel+ root=/dev/mapper/ol01-root ro crashkernel=2048M@35G crashkernel=250M,low rd.lvm.lv=ol01/root rd.lvm.lv=ol01/swap console=ttyS4 loglevel=7
Can you add :
Tested-by: John Donnelly <John.p.donnelly@oracle.com>
How can we get these changes included into an rc kernel release ?
Thanks,
John.
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>> previous discusses:
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lkml.org_lkml_2019_6_5_670&d=DwICAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=t2fPg9D87F7D8jm0_3CG9yoiIKdRg4qc_thBw4bzMhc&m=jOAu1DTDpohsWszalfTCYx46eGF19TSWVLchN5yBPgk&s=gS9BLOkmj78lP5L7SP6_VLHwvP249uWKaE2R7N7sxgM&e=
>>>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lkml.org_lkml_2019_6_13_229&d=DwICAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=t2fPg9D87F7D8jm0_3CG9yoiIKdRg4qc_thBw4bzMhc&m=jOAu1DTDpohsWszalfTCYx46eGF19TSWVLchN5yBPgk&s=U1Nis29n3A7XSBzED53fiE4MDAv5NlxYp1UorvvBOOw&e=
>>>
>>> Another concern from James:
>>> "
>>> With both crashk_low_res and crashk_res, we end up with two entries in /proc/iomem called
>>> "Crash kernel". Because its sorted by address, and kexec-tools stops searching when it
>>> find "Crash kernel", you are always going to get the kernel placed in the lower portion.
>>> "
>>>
>>> The kexec-tools code is iterating all "Crash kernel" ranges and add them
>>> in an array. In X86 code, it uses the higher range to locate memory.
>>
>> Then my hurried reading of what the user-space code does was wrong!
>>
>> If kexec-tools places the kernel in the low region, there may not be enough memory left
>> for whatever purpose it was reserved for. This was the motivation for giving it a
>> different name.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> James
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> kexec mailing list
>> kexec@lists.infradead.org
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.infradead.org_mailman_listinfo_kexec&d=DwICAg&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=t2fPg9D87F7D8jm0_3CG9yoiIKdRg4qc_thBw4bzMhc&m=jOAu1DTDpohsWszalfTCYx46eGF19TSWVLchN5yBPgk&s=bqp02iQDP_Ez-XvLIvj-IPHqbbZwMPlDgmEcG8vhXFE&e=
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> kexec mailing list
> kexec@lists.infradead.org
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.infradead.org_mailman_listinfo_kexec&d=DwIGaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=t2fPg9D87F7D8jm0_3CG9yoiIKdRg4qc_thBw4bzMhc&m=whm9_BOrgAjJvBn0Ey_brHhFg2YMU_P0HF02dhgdgwU&s=vLar_m5JbicYwwuo6N84ZiBDGZUPM8bBLSPLQBtPZNY&e=
_______________________________________________
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:[~2020-02-24 15:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-23 15:23 [PATCH v7 0/4] support reserving crashkernel above 4G on arm64 kdump Chen Zhou
2019-12-23 15:23 ` [PATCH v7 1/4] x86: kdump: move reserve_crashkernel_low() into crash_core.c Chen Zhou
2019-12-27 5:54 ` Dave Young
2019-12-27 11:04 ` Chen Zhou
2019-12-28 9:32 ` Dave Young
2019-12-31 1:39 ` Chen Zhou
2020-04-03 7:13 ` Chen Zhou
2020-01-16 15:17 ` James Morse
2020-01-16 15:47 ` John Donnelly
2020-02-24 15:25 ` John Donnelly [this message]
2020-03-02 1:29 ` Chen Zhou
2020-01-17 3:58 ` Dave Young
2020-04-03 7:29 ` Chen Zhou
2019-12-23 15:23 ` [PATCH v7 2/4] arm64: kdump: reserve crashkenel above 4G for crash dump kernel Chen Zhou
2020-03-05 10:13 ` Prabhakar Kushwaha
2020-03-07 11:06 ` Chen Zhou
2020-03-07 18:43 ` John Donnelly
2020-03-09 4:59 ` Prabhakar Kushwaha
2020-03-09 4:48 ` Prabhakar Kushwaha
2020-03-09 15:51 ` Prabhakar Kushwaha
2020-03-10 1:30 ` chenzhou
2020-03-10 17:08 ` Prabhakar Kushwaha
2020-03-11 1:44 ` chenzhou
2019-12-23 15:23 ` [PATCH v7 3/4] arm64: kdump: add memory for devices by DT property, low-memory-range Chen Zhou
2019-12-23 15:23 ` [PATCH v7 4/4] kdump: update Documentation about crashkernel on arm64 Chen Zhou
2020-03-26 3:09 ` [PATCH v7 0/4] support reserving crashkernel above 4G on arm64 kdump Chen Zhou
2020-05-19 10:21 ` Arnd Bergmann
2020-05-19 20:21 ` John Donnelly
2020-05-20 8:32 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2020-05-20 3:30 ` chenzhou
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=73F5F438-0B79-418D-8AA7-B1164D10AA24@oracle.com \
--to=john.p.donnelly@oracle.com \
--cc=bhsharma@redhat.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=chenzhou10@huawei.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=xiexiuqi@huawei.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
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).