From: "M. Mohan Kumar" <mohan@in.ibm.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, miltonm@bga.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Do not inline putprops function
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 20:05:49 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090807143549.GA3110@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1249568660.20200.23.camel@concordia>
Hi,
After enabling EARLY_DEBUG (and DEBUG in some of the files in
arch/powerpc/kernel directory), without forcing the dtstruct variable to 8
byte alignment:
# ./kexec -e
Starting new kernel
console [udbg0] enabled
-> early_setup(), dt_ptr: 0x7723000
-> early_init_devtree(c000000007723000)
Invalid tag 5 scanning flattened device tree !
search "chosen", depth: 0, uname:
Invalid tag 5 scanning flattened device tree !
dt_root_size_cells = 2
dt_root_addr_cells = 2
Invalid tag 5 scanning flattened device tree !
reserving: 128c000 -> 5ec1f7
reserving: 7734000 -> 8cc000
reserving: 7723000 -> f698
Phys. mem: 0
-> move_device_tree
<- move_device_tree
Scanning CPUs ...
Invalid tag 5 scanning flattened device tree !
<- early_init_devtree()
Probing machine type ...
pSeries ...
No suitable machine found !
So device-tree is getting corrupted when dtstruct variable is not aligned to
8 byte variable. This problem is not seen with gcc-3.4. Is it compiler
issue? or bug in the code.
Regards,
M. Mohan Kumar.
On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 12:24:20AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 22:19 +0530, M. Mohan Kumar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > When I align the dtstruct variable to 8 bytes, I am able to invoke kdump.
> >
> > When the line
> > static unsigned dtstruct[TREEWORDS], *dt;
> > changed to
> > static unsigned dtstruct[TREEWORDS] __attribute__ ((aligned (8))), *dt;
> >
> > kexec-tool works.
>
> Hmm, odd.
>
> Can you check how it's aligned without your change? ie. in the original
> binary, is it 4 byte aligned?
>
> When you make the change, is the only thing that changes in the binary
> the alignedness of dtstruct, or does it cause other things to move
> around?
>
> I don't think an unaligned dt blob should have any effect on the kernel,
> ie. it should copy it in fine, but I'd have to look at the code.
>
> cheers
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "M. Mohan Kumar" <mohan@in.ibm.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com>,
Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, miltonm@bga.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Do not inline putprops function
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 20:05:49 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090807143549.GA3110@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1249568660.20200.23.camel@concordia>
Hi,
After enabling EARLY_DEBUG (and DEBUG in some of the files in
arch/powerpc/kernel directory), without forcing the dtstruct variable to 8
byte alignment:
# ./kexec -e
Starting new kernel
console [udbg0] enabled
-> early_setup(), dt_ptr: 0x7723000
-> early_init_devtree(c000000007723000)
Invalid tag 5 scanning flattened device tree !
search "chosen", depth: 0, uname:
Invalid tag 5 scanning flattened device tree !
dt_root_size_cells = 2
dt_root_addr_cells = 2
Invalid tag 5 scanning flattened device tree !
reserving: 128c000 -> 5ec1f7
reserving: 7734000 -> 8cc000
reserving: 7723000 -> f698
Phys. mem: 0
-> move_device_tree
<- move_device_tree
Scanning CPUs ...
Invalid tag 5 scanning flattened device tree !
<- early_init_devtree()
Probing machine type ...
pSeries ...
No suitable machine found !
So device-tree is getting corrupted when dtstruct variable is not aligned to
8 byte variable. This problem is not seen with gcc-3.4. Is it compiler
issue? or bug in the code.
Regards,
M. Mohan Kumar.
On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 12:24:20AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-05 at 22:19 +0530, M. Mohan Kumar wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > When I align the dtstruct variable to 8 bytes, I am able to invoke kdump.
> >
> > When the line
> > static unsigned dtstruct[TREEWORDS], *dt;
> > changed to
> > static unsigned dtstruct[TREEWORDS] __attribute__ ((aligned (8))), *dt;
> >
> > kexec-tool works.
>
> Hmm, odd.
>
> Can you check how it's aligned without your change? ie. in the original
> binary, is it 4 byte aligned?
>
> When you make the change, is the only thing that changes in the binary
> the alignedness of dtstruct, or does it cause other things to move
> around?
>
> I don't think an unaligned dt blob should have any effect on the kernel,
> ie. it should copy it in fine, but I'd have to look at the code.
>
> cheers
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-07 14:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-17 11:34 [PATCH] Do not inline putprops function M. Mohan Kumar
2009-06-17 11:34 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-06-17 11:45 ` Simon Horman
2009-06-17 11:45 ` Simon Horman
2009-06-17 11:59 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-06-17 11:59 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-06-17 12:26 ` Michael Ellerman
2009-06-17 12:26 ` Michael Ellerman
2009-06-17 13:04 ` Neil Horman
2009-06-17 13:04 ` Neil Horman
2009-06-17 13:34 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-06-17 13:34 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-06-17 14:05 ` Neil Horman
2009-06-17 14:05 ` Neil Horman
2009-06-17 14:26 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-06-17 14:26 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-06-17 14:40 ` Neil Horman
2009-06-17 14:40 ` Neil Horman
2009-06-23 12:55 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-06-23 12:55 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-06-23 13:56 ` Neil Horman
2009-06-23 13:56 ` Neil Horman
2009-06-24 0:27 ` Michael Ellerman
2009-06-24 0:27 ` Michael Ellerman
2009-08-03 5:49 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-08-03 5:49 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-08-05 16:49 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-08-05 16:49 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-08-06 14:24 ` Michael Ellerman
2009-08-06 14:24 ` Michael Ellerman
2009-08-07 14:35 ` M. Mohan Kumar [this message]
2009-08-07 14:35 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-08-07 14:54 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-08-07 14:54 ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-08-10 1:51 ` Michael Ellerman
2009-08-10 1:51 ` Michael Ellerman
2009-08-10 7:37 ` Milton Miller
2009-08-10 7:37 ` Milton Miller
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=20090807143549.GA3110@in.ibm.com \
--to=mohan@in.ibm.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=michael@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=miltonm@bga.com \
--cc=nhorman@redhat.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 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.