linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com>
To: Aneesh Kumar K V <aneesh.kumar@kernel.org>,
	Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
	Aneesh Kumar K V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
Cc: Aditya Gupta <adityag@linux.ibm.com>,
	Mahesh Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.ibm.com>,
	Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] powerpc: make fadump resilient with memory add/remove events
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:50:14 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a5cf8f63-2dda-41d5-9231-aca25b7e6960@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47a119c1-05e9-47fb-9cc7-85aa7e1e4ae7@kernel.org>

Hello Aneesh,

On 22/11/23 17:50, Aneesh Kumar K V wrote:
> On 11/22/23 4:05 PM, Sourabh Jain wrote:
>> Hello Michael,
>>
>>
>> On 22/11/23 10:47, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>> Aneesh Kumar K V <aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com> writes:
>>> ...
>>>> I am not sure whether we need to add all the complexity to enable supporting different fadump kernel
>>>> version. Is that even a possible use case with fadump? Can't we always assume that with fadump the
>>>> crash kernel and fadump kernel will be same version?
>>> How sure are we of that?
>>>
>>> Don't we go through grub when we boot into the 2nd kernel. And so
>>> couldn't it choose to boot a different kernel, for whatever reason.
>>>
>>> I don't think we need to support different pt_reg / cpumask sizes, but
>>> requiring the exact same kernel version is too strict I think.
>> Agree.
>>> But maybe I'm wrong. Would be good to hear what distro folks think.
>> How about checking fadump crash info header compatibility in the following way?
>>
>> static bool is_fadump_header_compatible(struct fadump_crash_info_header *fdh)
>> {
>>      if (fdh->magic_number == FADUMP_CRASH_INFO_MAGIC_OLD) {
>>          pr_err("Old magic number, can't process the dump.");
>>          return false;
>>      }
>>
>>      if (fdh->magic_number != FADUMP_CRASH_INFO_MAGIC) {
>>          pr_err("Fadump header is corrupted.");
>>          return false;
>>      }
>>
>>      /*
>>       * If the kernel version of the first/crashed kernel and the second/fadump
>>       * kernel is not same, then only collect the dump if the size of all
>>       * non-primitive type members of the fadump header is the same across kernels.
>>       */
>>      if (strcmp(fdh->kernel_version, init_uts_ns.name.release)) {
>>          if (fdh->pt_regs_sz != sizeof(struct pt_regs) || fdh->cpu_mask_sz != sizeof(struct cpumask)) {
>>              pr_err("Fadump header size mismatch.\n")
>>              return false;
>>          } else
>>              pr_warn("Kernel version mismatch; dump data is unreliable.\n");
>>      }
>>
> You also want a fdh->version check?

Even though we don't have any action against an fdh->version right now, 
I think I should
check the fadump header version. Currently, if the version doesn't 
match, it means the
header is corrupted.

> I am still not sure you need the kernel_version check. IMHO that is too strict
> and can hit that check where you have kexec kernel which is not installed in /boot crashing?

If the kernel versions mismatch, we still collect the dump if the 
`pt_regs` and `cpu_mask`
sizes are the same across the kernels. The kernel version check is just 
to warn users that
the collected dump may be unreliable.

Should I remove the kernel_version filed from fadump crash info header 
and remove the
the kernel version check while processing the kernel dump?

Thanks,
Sourabh Jain

  reply	other threads:[~2023-11-24  5:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-29 12:45 [PATCH v5 0/3] powerpc: make fadump resilient with memory add/remove events Sourabh Jain
2023-10-29 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 1/3] " Sourabh Jain
2023-11-09 12:14   ` Michael Ellerman
2023-11-13  6:42     ` Sourabh Jain
2023-11-15  4:44   ` Aneesh Kumar K.V
2023-11-17  4:33     ` Sourabh Jain
2023-11-17  5:31       ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2023-11-17  6:14         ` Hari Bathini
2023-11-22  5:17         ` Michael Ellerman
2023-11-22 10:35           ` Sourabh Jain
2023-11-22 12:20             ` Aneesh Kumar K V
2023-11-24  5:20               ` Sourabh Jain [this message]
2023-11-22 12:52             ` Michael Ellerman
2023-11-24  7:21               ` Sourabh Jain
2023-10-29 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 2/3] powerpc/fadump: add hotplug_ready sysfs interface Sourabh Jain
2023-10-29 12:45 ` [PATCH v5 3/3] Documentation/powerpc: update fadump implementation details Sourabh Jain

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=a5cf8f63-2dda-41d5-9231-aca25b7e6960@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=adityag@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@kernel.org \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=hbathini@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    /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).