All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] kexec_file: Generalize kexec_add_buffer.
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:08:19 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <11831785.bAnhpkoBlL@hactar> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160613072939.GD4974@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>

Hello Dave,

Thanks for the quick review and for your comments.

I'll separate the change to add arch_walk_system_ram and the change to add 
kexec_locate_mem_hole into different patches, and add error handling for 
KEXEC_ON_CRASH.

Am Montag, 13 Juni 2016, 15:29:39 schrieb Dave Young:
> On 06/12/16 at 12:10am, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> > Allow architectures to specify different memory walking functions for
> > kexec_add_buffer. Intel uses iomem to track reserved memory ranges,
> > but PowerPC uses the memblock subsystem.
> 
> Can the crashk_res be inserted to iomem_resource so that only one
> weak function for system ram is needed?

Sorry, it's not clear to me what you mean by inserting crashk_res into 
iomem_resource, but I can add a bool for_crashkernel to arch_walk_system_ram 
so that it can decide which kind of memory to traverse, so the default 
implementation of kexec_file.c would be:

int __weak arch_walk_system_ram(bool for_crashkernel, unsigned long start,
				unsigned long end, bool top_down,
				void *data,
				int (*func)(u64, u64, void *))
{
	int ret;

	if (for_crashkernel)
		ret = walk_iomem_res_desc(crashk_res.desc,
					  IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM |
					  IORESOURCE_BUSY,
					  start, end, data, func);
	else
		ret = walk_system_ram_res(start, end, data, func);

	if (ret != 1) {
		/* A suitable memory range could not be found for buffer */
		return -EADDRNOTAVAIL;
	}
}

and kexec_add_buffer / kexec_locate_mem_hole would call it with:

	if (image->type == KEXEC_TYPE_CRASH)
		ret = arch_walk_system_ram(true, crashk_res.start,
					   crashk_res.end, top_down, &buf,
					   locate_mem_hole_callback);
	else
		ret = arch_walk_system_ram(false, 0, -1, top_down, &buf,
					   locate_mem_hole_callback);

What do you think?

-- 
[]'s
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center


_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] kexec_file: Generalize kexec_add_buffer.
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:08:19 -0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <11831785.bAnhpkoBlL@hactar> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160613072939.GD4974@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>

Hello Dave,

Thanks for the quick review and for your comments.

I'll separate the change to add arch_walk_system_ram and the change to add 
kexec_locate_mem_hole into different patches, and add error handling for 
KEXEC_ON_CRASH.

Am Montag, 13 Juni 2016, 15:29:39 schrieb Dave Young:
> On 06/12/16 at 12:10am, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> > Allow architectures to specify different memory walking functions for
> > kexec_add_buffer. Intel uses iomem to track reserved memory ranges,
> > but PowerPC uses the memblock subsystem.
> 
> Can the crashk_res be inserted to iomem_resource so that only one
> weak function for system ram is needed?

Sorry, it's not clear to me what you mean by inserting crashk_res into 
iomem_resource, but I can add a bool for_crashkernel to arch_walk_system_ram 
so that it can decide which kind of memory to traverse, so the default 
implementation of kexec_file.c would be:

int __weak arch_walk_system_ram(bool for_crashkernel, unsigned long start,
				unsigned long end, bool top_down,
				void *data,
				int (*func)(u64, u64, void *))
{
	int ret;

	if (for_crashkernel)
		ret = walk_iomem_res_desc(crashk_res.desc,
					  IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM |
					  IORESOURCE_BUSY,
					  start, end, data, func);
	else
		ret = walk_system_ram_res(start, end, data, func);

	if (ret != 1) {
		/* A suitable memory range could not be found for buffer */
		return -EADDRNOTAVAIL;
	}
}

and kexec_add_buffer / kexec_locate_mem_hole would call it with:

	if (image->type == KEXEC_TYPE_CRASH)
		ret = arch_walk_system_ram(true, crashk_res.start,
					   crashk_res.end, top_down, &buf,
					   locate_mem_hole_callback);
	else
		ret = arch_walk_system_ram(false, 0, -1, top_down, &buf,
					   locate_mem_hole_callback);

What do you think?

-- 
[]'s
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center

  reply	other threads:[~2016-06-13 19:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-06-12  3:10 [PATCH 0/8] kexec_file_load implementation for PowerPC Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10 ` [PATCH 1/8] kexec_file: Remove unused members from struct kexec_buf Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-13  7:05   ` Dave Young
2016-06-13  7:05     ` Dave Young
2016-06-12  3:10 ` [PATCH 2/8] kexec_file: Generalize kexec_add_buffer Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-13  7:12   ` Dave Young
2016-06-13  7:12     ` Dave Young
2016-06-13  7:29   ` Dave Young
2016-06-13  7:29     ` Dave Young
2016-06-13 19:08     ` Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message]
2016-06-13 19:08       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-13 20:40       ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-13 20:40         ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-14  1:22       ` Dave Young
2016-06-14  1:22         ` Dave Young
2016-06-12  3:10 ` [PATCH 3/8] powerpc: Factor out relocation code from module_64.c to elf_util_64.c Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10 ` [PATCH 4/8] powerpc: Generalize elf64_apply_relocate_add Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10 ` [PATCH 5/8] powerpc: Add functions to read ELF files of any endianness Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10 ` [PATCH 6/8] powerpc: Implement kexec_file_load Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10 ` [PATCH 7/8] powerpc: Add support for loading ELF kernels with kexec_file_load Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10 ` [PATCH 8/8] powerpc: Add purgatory for kexec_file_load implementation Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-12  3:10   ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2016-06-13  7:02 ` [PATCH 0/8] kexec_file_load implementation for PowerPC Dave Young
2016-06-13  7:02   ` Dave Young

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=11831785.bAnhpkoBlL@hactar \
    --to=bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.