linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
To: Chen Zhou <chenzhou10@huawei.com>
Cc: wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com, horms@verge.net.au,
	ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	rppt@linux.ibm.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	takahiro.akashi@linaro.org, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,
	ebiederm@xmission.com, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] arm64: kdump: support reserving crashkernel above 4G
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2019 17:29:54 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <df2b659d-7406-fbfd-597d-be3a3f69abcb@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190507035058.63992-3-chenzhou10@huawei.com>

Hello,

On 07/05/2019 04:50, Chen Zhou wrote:
> When crashkernel is reserved above 4G in memory, kernel should
> reserve some amount of low memory for swiotlb and some DMA buffers.

> Meanwhile, support crashkernel=X,[high,low] in arm64. When use
> crashkernel=X parameter, try low memory first and fall back to high
> memory unless "crashkernel=X,high" is specified.

What is the 'unless crashkernel=...,high' for? I think it would be simpler to relax the
ARCH_LOW_ADDRESS_LIMIT if reserve_crashkernel_low() allocated something.

This way "crashkernel=1G" tries to allocate 1G below 4G, but fails if there isn't enough
memory. "crashkernel=1G crashkernel=16M,low" allocates 16M below 4G, which is more likely
to succeed, if it does it can then place the 1G block anywhere.


> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> index 413d566..82cd9a0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -243,6 +243,9 @@ static void __init request_standard_resources(void)
>  			request_resource(res, &kernel_data);
>  #ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE
>  		/* Userspace will find "Crash kernel" region in /proc/iomem. */
> +		if (crashk_low_res.end && crashk_low_res.start >= res->start &&
> +		    crashk_low_res.end <= res->end)
> +			request_resource(res, &crashk_low_res);
>  		if (crashk_res.end && crashk_res.start >= res->start &&
>  		    crashk_res.end <= res->end)
>  			request_resource(res, &crashk_res);

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.

I suspect this isn't what you want, can we rename crashk_low_res for arm64 so that
existing kexec-tools doesn't use it?


> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> index d2adffb..3fcd739 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> @@ -74,20 +74,37 @@ phys_addr_t arm64_dma_phys_limit __ro_after_init;
>  static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
>  {
>  	unsigned long long crash_base, crash_size;
> +	bool high = false;
>  	int ret;
>  
>  	ret = parse_crashkernel(boot_command_line, memblock_phys_mem_size(),
>  				&crash_size, &crash_base);
>  	/* no crashkernel= or invalid value specified */
> -	if (ret || !crash_size)
> -		return;
> +	if (ret || !crash_size) {
> +		/* crashkernel=X,high */
> +		ret = parse_crashkernel_high(boot_command_line,
> +				memblock_phys_mem_size(),
> +				&crash_size, &crash_base);
> +		if (ret || !crash_size)
> +			return;
> +		high = true;
> +	}
>  
>  	crash_size = PAGE_ALIGN(crash_size);
>  
>  	if (crash_base == 0) {
> -		/* Current arm64 boot protocol requires 2MB alignment */
> -		crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(0, ARCH_LOW_ADDRESS_LIMIT,
> -				crash_size, SZ_2M);
> +		/*
> +		 * Try low memory first and fall back to high memory
> +		 * unless "crashkernel=size[KMG],high" is specified.
> +		 */
> +		if (!high)
> +			crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(0,
> +					ARCH_LOW_ADDRESS_LIMIT,
> +					crash_size, CRASH_ALIGN);
> +		if (!crash_base)
> +			crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(0,
> +					memblock_end_of_DRAM(),
> +					crash_size, CRASH_ALIGN);
>  		if (crash_base == 0) {
>  			pr_warn("cannot allocate crashkernel (size:0x%llx)\n",
>  				crash_size);
> @@ -105,13 +122,18 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
>  			return;
>  		}
>  
> -		if (!IS_ALIGNED(crash_base, SZ_2M)) {
> +		if (!IS_ALIGNED(crash_base, CRASH_ALIGN)) {
>  			pr_warn("cannot reserve crashkernel: base address is not 2MB aligned\n");
>  			return;
>  		}
>  	}
>  	memblock_reserve(crash_base, crash_size);
>  
> +	if (crash_base >= SZ_4G && reserve_crashkernel_low()) {
> +		memblock_free(crash_base, crash_size);
> +		return;

This is going to be annoying on platforms that don't have, and don't need memory below 4G.
A "crashkernel=...,low" on these system will break crashdump. I don't think we should
expect users to know the memory layout. (I'm assuming distro's are going to add a low
reservation everywhere, just in case)

I think the 'low' region should be a small optional/best-effort extra, that kexec-tools
can't touch.


I'm afraid you've missed the ugly bit of the crashkernel reservation...

arch/arm64/mm/mmu.c::map_mem() marks the crashkernel as 'nomap' during the first pass of
page-table generation. This means it isn't mapped in the linear map. It then maps it with
page-size mappings, and removes the nomap flag.

This is done so that arch_kexec_protect_crashkres() and
arch_kexec_unprotect_crashkres() can remove the valid bits of the crashkernel mapping.
This way the old-kernel can't accidentally overwrite the crashkernel. It also saves us if
the old-kernel and the crashkernel use different memory attributes for the mapping.

As your low-memory reservation is intended to be used for devices, having it mapped by the
old-kernel as cacheable memory is going to cause problems if those CPUs aren't taken
offline and go corrupting this memory. (we did crash for a reason after all)


I think the simplest thing to do is mark the low region as 'nomap' in
reserve_crashkernel() and always leave it unmapped. We can then describe it via a
different string in /proc/iomem, something like "Crash kernel (low)". Older kexec-tools
shouldn't use it, (I assume its not using strncmp() in a way that would do this by
accident), and newer kexec-tools can know to describe it in the DT, but it can't write to it.


Thanks,

James

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

  reply	other threads:[~2019-06-05 16:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-07  3:50 [PATCH 0/4] support reserving crashkernel above 4G on arm64 kdump Chen Zhou
2019-05-07  3:50 ` [PATCH 1/4] x86: kdump: move reserve_crashkernel_low() into kexec_core.c Chen Zhou
2019-06-05 16:29   ` James Morse
2019-06-13 11:26     ` Chen Zhou
2019-06-12  8:45   ` Dave Young
2019-06-13 11:27     ` Chen Zhou
2019-05-07  3:50 ` [PATCH 2/4] arm64: kdump: support reserving crashkernel above 4G Chen Zhou
2019-06-05 16:29   ` James Morse [this message]
2019-06-13 11:27     ` Chen Zhou
2019-06-13 12:44       ` James Morse
2019-05-07  3:50 ` [PATCH 3/4] memblock: extend memblock_cap_memory_range to multiple ranges Chen Zhou
2019-05-07  3:50 ` [PATCH 4/4] kdump: update Documentation about crashkernel on arm64 Chen Zhou
2019-05-15  5:16   ` Bhupesh Sharma
2019-05-16  3:23     ` Chen Zhou
2019-05-15  5:06 ` [PATCH 0/4] support reserving crashkernel above 4G on arm64 kdump Bhupesh Sharma
2019-05-16  3:19   ` Chen Zhou
2019-06-03  2:24     ` Chen Zhou
2019-06-05 16:32 ` James Morse
2019-06-13 11:27   ` Chen Zhou
2019-06-13 12:43     ` James Morse

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=df2b659d-7406-fbfd-597d-be3a3f69abcb@arm.com \
    --to=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=chenzhou10@huawei.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=horms@verge.net.au \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=rppt@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com \
    --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
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).