From: Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@redhat.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
Chen Zhou <chenzhou10@huawei.com>,
huawei.libin@huawei.com, guohanjun@huawei.com,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
RuiRui Yang <dyoung@redhat.com>,
John Donnelly <john.p.donnelly@oracle.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
xiexiuqi@huawei.com, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
kexec mailing list <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Prabhakar Kushwaha <prabhakar.pkin@gmail.com>,
nsaenzjulienne@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 0/9] support reserving crashkernel above 4G on arm64 kdump
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 12:37:49 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACi5LpMmccLX9p0ZXnEbWHgn2LRrVSDQZF9zBGzfZySe3TvXEQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201006180012.GB31946@C02TF0J2HF1T.local>
Hi Catalin,
On Tue, Oct 6, 2020 at 11:30 PM Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 11:12:10PM +0530, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> > I think my earlier email with the test results on this series bounced
> > off the mailing list server (for some weird reason), but I still see
> > several issues with this patchset. I will add specific issues in the
> > review comments for each patch again, but overall, with a crashkernel
> > size of say 786M, I see the following issue:
> >
> > # cat /proc/cmdline
> > BOOT_IMAGE=(hd7,gpt2)/vmlinuz-5.9.0-rc7+ root=<..snip..> rd.lvm.lv=<..snip..> crashkernel=786M
> >
> > I see two regions of size 786M and 256M reserved in low and high
> > regions respectively, So we reserve a total of 1042M of memory, which
> > is an incorrect behaviour:
> >
> > # dmesg | grep -i crash
> > [ 0.000000] Reserving 256MB of low memory at 2816MB for crashkernel (System low RAM: 768MB)
> > [ 0.000000] Reserving 786MB of memory at 654158MB for crashkernel (System RAM: 130816MB)
> > [ 0.000000] Kernel command line: BOOT_IMAGE=(hd2,gpt2)/vmlinuz-5.9.0-rc7+ root=/dev/mapper/rhel_ampere--hr330a--03-root ro rd.lvm.lv=rhel_ampere-hr330a-03/root rd.lvm.lv=rhel_ampere-hr330a-03/swap crashkernel=786M cma=1024M
> >
> > # cat /proc/iomem | grep -i crash
> > b0000000-bfffffff : Crash kernel (low)
> > bfcbe00000-bffcffffff : Crash kernel
>
> As Chen said, that's the intended behaviour and how x86 works. The
> requested 768M goes in the high range if there's not enough low memory
> and an additional buffer for swiotlb is allocated, hence the low 256M.
I understand, but why 256M (as low) for arm64? x86_64 setups usually
have more system memory available as compared to several commercially
available arm64 setups. So is the intent, just to keep the behavior
similar between arm64 and x86_64?
Should we have a CONFIG option / bootarg to help one select the max
'low_size'? Currently the ' low_size' value is calculated as:
/*
* two parts from kernel/dma/swiotlb.c:
* -swiotlb size: user-specified with swiotlb= or default.
*
* -swiotlb overflow buffer: now hardcoded to 32k. We round it
* to 8M for other buffers that may need to stay low too. Also
* make sure we allocate enough extra low memory so that we
* don't run out of DMA buffers for 32-bit devices.
*/
low_size = max(swiotlb_size_or_default() + (8UL << 20), 256UL << 20);
Since many arm64 boards ship with swiotlb=0 (turned off) via kernel
bootargs, the low_size, still ends up being 256M in such cases,
whereas this 256M can be used for some other purposes - so should we
be limiting this to 64M and failing the crash kernel allocation
request (gracefully) otherwise?
> We could (as an additional patch), subtract the 256M from the high
> allocation so that you'd get a low 256M and a high 512M, not sure it's
> worth it. Note that with a "crashkernel=768M,high" option, you still get
> the additional low 256M, otherwise the crashkernel won't be able to
> boot as there's no memory in ZONE_DMA. In the explicit ",high" request
> case, I'm not sure subtracted the 256M is more intuitive.
> In 5.11, we also hope to fix the ZONE_DMA layout for non-RPi4 platforms
> to cover the entire 32-bit address space (i.e. identical to the current
> ZONE_DMA32).
>
> > IMO, we should test this feature more before including this in 5.11
>
> Definitely. That's one of the reasons we haven't queued it yet. So any
> help with testing here is appreciated.
Sure, I am running more checks on this series. I will be soon back
with more updates.
Regards,
Bhupesh
_______________________________________________
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:[~2020-10-07 7:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-07 13:47 [PATCH v12 0/9] support reserving crashkernel above 4G on arm64 kdump Chen Zhou
2020-09-07 13:47 ` [PATCH v12 1/9] x86: kdump: move CRASH_ALIGN to 2M Chen Zhou
2020-09-08 1:21 ` Dave Young
2020-09-08 3:19 ` chenzhou
2020-09-07 13:47 ` [PATCH v12 2/9] x86: kdump: make the lower bound of crash kernel reservation consistent Chen Zhou
2020-09-07 13:47 ` [PATCH v12 3/9] x86: kdump: use macro CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX in functions reserve_crashkernel[_low]() Chen Zhou
2020-09-18 3:01 ` Dave Young
2020-09-18 3:57 ` chenzhou
2020-09-18 5:26 ` Dave Young
2020-09-18 7:25 ` Baoquan He
2020-09-18 8:59 ` chenzhou
2020-09-18 9:06 ` chenzhou
2020-10-05 17:20 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-09-07 13:47 ` [PATCH v12 4/9] x86: kdump: move reserve_crashkernel[_low]() into crash_core.c Chen Zhou
2020-09-07 13:47 ` [PATCH v12 5/9] arm64: kdump: introduce some macroes for crash kernel reservation Chen Zhou
2020-09-07 13:47 ` [PATCH v12 6/9] arm64: kdump: reimplement crashkernel=X Chen Zhou
2020-10-05 17:16 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-06 1:30 ` chenzhou
2020-09-07 13:47 ` [PATCH v12 7/9] kdump: add threshold for the required memory Chen Zhou
2020-10-05 17:12 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-06 1:34 ` chenzhou
2020-09-07 13:47 ` [PATCH v12 8/9] arm64: kdump: add memory for devices by DT property linux, usable-memory-range Chen Zhou
2020-09-07 13:47 ` [PATCH v12 9/9] kdump: update Documentation about crashkernel Chen Zhou
2020-10-05 17:19 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-06 2:10 ` chenzhou
2020-10-07 16:24 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-09-12 11:44 ` [PATCH v12 0/9] support reserving crashkernel above 4G on arm64 kdump John Donnelly
2020-10-05 17:09 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-05 17:42 ` Bhupesh Sharma
2020-10-06 1:48 ` chenzhou
2020-10-06 18:00 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-07 7:07 ` Bhupesh Sharma [this message]
2020-10-07 16:33 ` Catalin Marinas
2020-10-19 2:43 ` chenzhou
2020-09-15 7:16 ` chenzhou
2020-09-23 17:47 ` John Donnelly
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=CACi5LpMmccLX9p0ZXnEbWHgn2LRrVSDQZF9zBGzfZySe3TvXEQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=bhsharma@redhat.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=chenzhou10@huawei.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=guohanjun@huawei.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=huawei.libin@huawei.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=john.p.donnelly@oracle.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=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nsaenzjulienne@suse.de \
--cc=prabhakar.pkin@gmail.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
--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).