From: Mahesh Jagannath Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Milton Miller <miltonm@bga.com>,
Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/10] fadump: Reserve the memory for firmware assisted dump.
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 17:29:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E660B3B.3070608@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110831141134.590c4f4e@kryten>
Hi Anton,
On 08/31/2011 09:41 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>
> Hi Mahesh,
>
> Just a few comments.
>
>> +#define RMR_START 0x0
>> +#define RMR_END (0x1UL << 28) /* 256 MB */
>
> What if the RMO is bigger than 256MB? Should we be using ppc64_rma_size?
The idea was to have a minimum memory threshold that requires for a
kernel to boot successfully. On some Power systems where RMO is 128MB,
it still requires minimum of 256MB for kernel to boot successfully.
I think we can rename above #defines as BOOT_MEM_START and BOOT_MEM_END
respectively and have BOOT_MEM_END defined as below:
#define BOOT_MEM_END ((ppc64_rma_size < (0x1UL << 28)) ? \
(0x1UL << 28) : ppc64_rma_size)
What do you think?
>
>> +#ifdef DEBUG
>> +#define PREFIX "fadump: "
>> +#define DBG(fmt...) printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX fmt)
>> +#else
>> +#define DBG(fmt...)
>> +#endif
>
> We should use the standard debug macros (pr_debug etc).
Sure will do that.
>
>> +/* Global variable to hold firmware assisted dump configuration info. */
>> +static struct fw_dump fw_dump;
>
> You can remove this comment, especially because the variable isn't global :)
Agree.
>
>> + sections = of_get_flat_dt_prop(node, "ibm,configure-kernel-dump-sizes",
>> + NULL);
>> +
>> + if (!sections)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < FW_DUMP_NUM_SECTIONS; i++) {
>> + switch (sections[i].dump_section) {
>> + case FADUMP_CPU_STATE_DATA:
>> + fw_dump.cpu_state_data_size =
>> sections[i].section_size;
>> + break;
>> + case FADUMP_HPTE_REGION:
>> + fw_dump.hpte_region_size =
>> sections[i].section_size;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + return 1;
>> +}
>
> This makes me a bit nervous. We should really get the size of the property
> and use it to iterate through the array. I saw no requirement in the PAPR
> that the array had to be 2 entries long.
>
Agree. Will make the change.
>> +static inline unsigned long calculate_reserve_size(void)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long size;
>> +
>> + /* divide by 20 to get 5% of value */
>> + size = memblock_end_of_DRAM();
>> + do_div(size, 20);
>> +
>> + /* round it down in multiples of 256 */
>> + size = size & ~0x0FFFFFFFUL;
>> +
>> + /* Truncate to memory_limit. We don't want to over reserve
>> the memory.*/
>> + if (memory_limit && size > memory_limit)
>> + size = memory_limit;
>> +
>> + return (size > RMR_END ? size : RMR_END);
>> +}
>
> 5% is pretty aribitrary, that's 400GB on an 8TB box. Also our experience
> with kdump is that 256MB is too small. Is there any reason to scale it
> with memory size? Can we do what kdump does and set it to a single
> value (eg 512MB)?
I have picked up this heuristic from the phyp-assisted dump code. I am
yet to figure out a fool-proof method to calculate the minimum memory
needed for any Power box to successfully boot. Till then, I presume we
can use this heuristic based approach?
While testing these patches on huge power system with 1TB RAM and 896
CPUs, I found that even 512MB is small. Hence setting it to a single
value may not work for all system configuration.
>
> We could override the default with a boot option, which is similar to
> how kdump specifies the region to reserve.
Agree, will work on the change.
Thanks,
-Mahesh.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mahesh Jagannath Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>,
Milton Miller <miltonm@bga.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/10] fadump: Reserve the memory for firmware assisted dump.
Date: Tue, 06 Sep 2011 17:29:55 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E660B3B.3070608@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110831141134.590c4f4e@kryten>
Hi Anton,
On 08/31/2011 09:41 AM, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>
> Hi Mahesh,
>
> Just a few comments.
>
>> +#define RMR_START 0x0
>> +#define RMR_END (0x1UL << 28) /* 256 MB */
>
> What if the RMO is bigger than 256MB? Should we be using ppc64_rma_size?
The idea was to have a minimum memory threshold that requires for a
kernel to boot successfully. On some Power systems where RMO is 128MB,
it still requires minimum of 256MB for kernel to boot successfully.
I think we can rename above #defines as BOOT_MEM_START and BOOT_MEM_END
respectively and have BOOT_MEM_END defined as below:
#define BOOT_MEM_END ((ppc64_rma_size < (0x1UL << 28)) ? \
(0x1UL << 28) : ppc64_rma_size)
What do you think?
>
>> +#ifdef DEBUG
>> +#define PREFIX "fadump: "
>> +#define DBG(fmt...) printk(KERN_ERR PREFIX fmt)
>> +#else
>> +#define DBG(fmt...)
>> +#endif
>
> We should use the standard debug macros (pr_debug etc).
Sure will do that.
>
>> +/* Global variable to hold firmware assisted dump configuration info. */
>> +static struct fw_dump fw_dump;
>
> You can remove this comment, especially because the variable isn't global :)
Agree.
>
>> + sections = of_get_flat_dt_prop(node, "ibm,configure-kernel-dump-sizes",
>> + NULL);
>> +
>> + if (!sections)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + for (i = 0; i < FW_DUMP_NUM_SECTIONS; i++) {
>> + switch (sections[i].dump_section) {
>> + case FADUMP_CPU_STATE_DATA:
>> + fw_dump.cpu_state_data_size =
>> sections[i].section_size;
>> + break;
>> + case FADUMP_HPTE_REGION:
>> + fw_dump.hpte_region_size =
>> sections[i].section_size;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + return 1;
>> +}
>
> This makes me a bit nervous. We should really get the size of the property
> and use it to iterate through the array. I saw no requirement in the PAPR
> that the array had to be 2 entries long.
>
Agree. Will make the change.
>> +static inline unsigned long calculate_reserve_size(void)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long size;
>> +
>> + /* divide by 20 to get 5% of value */
>> + size = memblock_end_of_DRAM();
>> + do_div(size, 20);
>> +
>> + /* round it down in multiples of 256 */
>> + size = size & ~0x0FFFFFFFUL;
>> +
>> + /* Truncate to memory_limit. We don't want to over reserve
>> the memory.*/
>> + if (memory_limit && size > memory_limit)
>> + size = memory_limit;
>> +
>> + return (size > RMR_END ? size : RMR_END);
>> +}
>
> 5% is pretty aribitrary, that's 400GB on an 8TB box. Also our experience
> with kdump is that 256MB is too small. Is there any reason to scale it
> with memory size? Can we do what kdump does and set it to a single
> value (eg 512MB)?
I have picked up this heuristic from the phyp-assisted dump code. I am
yet to figure out a fool-proof method to calculate the minimum memory
needed for any Power box to successfully boot. Till then, I presume we
can use this heuristic based approach?
While testing these patches on huge power system with 1TB RAM and 896
CPUs, I found that even 512MB is small. Hence setting it to a single
value may not work for all system configuration.
>
> We could override the default with a boot option, which is similar to
> how kdump specifies the region to reserve.
Agree, will work on the change.
Thanks,
-Mahesh.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-09-06 12:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-13 18:06 [RFC PATCH 00/10] fadump: Firmware-assisted dump support for Powerpc Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:06 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:06 ` [RFC PATCH 01/10] fadump: Add documentation for firmware-assisted dump Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:06 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:06 ` [RFC PATCH 02/10] fadump: Reserve the memory for firmware assisted dump Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:06 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-08-31 4:11 ` Anton Blanchard
2011-08-31 4:11 ` Anton Blanchard
2011-09-06 11:59 ` Mahesh Jagannath Salgaonkar [this message]
2011-09-06 11:59 ` Mahesh Jagannath Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:07 ` [RFC PATCH 03/10] fadump: Register " Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:07 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-08-31 4:20 ` Anton Blanchard
2011-08-31 4:20 ` Anton Blanchard
2011-09-07 7:20 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-09-07 7:20 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-09-08 18:34 ` Kumar Gala
2011-09-08 18:34 ` Kumar Gala
2011-07-13 18:07 ` [RFC PATCH 04/10] fadump: Initialize elfcore header and add PT_LOAD program headers Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:07 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:07 ` [RFC PATCH 05/10] fadump: Convert firmware-assisted cpu state dump data into elf notes Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:07 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-08-31 4:23 ` Anton Blanchard
2011-08-31 4:23 ` Anton Blanchard
2011-07-13 18:07 ` [RFC PATCH 06/10] fadump: Add PT_NOTE program header for vmcoreinfo Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:07 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:08 ` [RFC PATCH 07/10] fadump: Introduce cleanup routine to invalidate /proc/vmcore Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:08 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:08 ` [RFC PATCH 08/10] fadump: Invalidate registration and release reserved memory for general use Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:08 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:08 ` [RFC PATCH 09/10] fadump: Invalidate the fadump registration during machine shutdown Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:08 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:08 ` [RFC PATCH 10/10] fadump: Introduce config option for firmware assisted dump feature Mahesh J Salgaonkar
2011-07-13 18:08 ` Mahesh J Salgaonkar
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=4E660B3B.3070608@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=michael@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=miltonm@bga.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.