All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@hp.com>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Cc: horms@verge.net.au, kexec@lists.infradead.org, vgoyal@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH]kdump: pass noefi and acpi_rsdp= to 2nd kernel
Date: Thu, 06 Sep 2012 11:57:34 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5048E40E.7040003@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <504815EB.9000701@redhat.com>

On 09/05/2012 09:18 PM, Dave Young wrote:
>
>> I think running a kexec/kdump kernel with "noefi" is not a good idea.
>> Today kernel makes very little use of UEFI run time services but this
>> might change shortly. I have already seen ideas being proposed to use
>> UEFI variables to store kernel panic information which would require
>> accessing UEFI runtime services. If the kdump kernel runs into a panic,
>> it would be good to be able to use UEFI variables to store some sort of
>> tombstone. We might also start using UEFI runtime clock services one of
>> these days especially now that all PCs soon will have UEFI due to
>> Windows 8 requirements. There might be other ways to deal with EFI
>> virtualization issue. I have solved it on a custom ia64 kernel by
>> passing the kexec'd kernel a "kexec_reboot" on command line, although I
>> wouldn't recommend that approach as a general approach. Creating a new
>> kernel command line parameter just to tell the kernel to not virtualize
>> EFI sounds excessive. May be we can come up with a different way to tell
>> a kexec/kdump kernel to not virtualize EFI, like create a new signature,
>> for example "EL32_KEXEC" and "EL64_KEXEC", for
>> boot_params.efi_info.efi_loader_signature which tells the kexec/kdump
>> kernel to enable EFI but skip the step of virtualizing it. More work
>> will be needed to make this work, for example pass the EFI runtime
>> service memory map from one kernel to the next so we keep it mapped in
>> exact same spot, and other similar mapping issues.
>>
>
> I'm not so familiar with uefi detail, is the virtualization issue mean
> "virtual mode" of efi?  From my understanding for kdump kernel I would
> vote for not interacting with bios at all. We have use "noefi" for long
> time by passing it to 2nd kernel while kexecing. I prefer to do this way
> until we have to switch to other approach.
>
Yes, that is what I mean by virtualizing issue. Using "noefi" for kdump 
kernel will keep it from using any runtime EFI services. That could mean 
kdump kernel may not be able to read clock or use EFI variables to store 
a tombstone in case it runs into trouble. Is that acceptable?

For the kexec'd kernel (not kdump kernel), being able to use runtime EFI 
services will be essential as we move to EFI machines. We will have to 
support enabling EFI on a kexec'd kernel. Does that sound reasonable?

-- 
Khalid

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

  reply	other threads:[~2012-09-06 17:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-05  5:44 [PATCH]kdump: pass noefi and acpi_rsdp= to 2nd kernel Dave Young
2012-09-05  7:45 ` Simon Horman
2012-09-06  2:48   ` Dave Young
2012-09-05 13:18 ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-06  2:58   ` Dave Young
2012-09-06 20:46     ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-05 23:09 ` Khalid Aziz
2012-09-06  3:18   ` Dave Young
2012-09-06 17:57     ` Khalid Aziz [this message]
2012-09-07  8:56       ` Dave Young
2012-09-07 14:37         ` Khalid Aziz
2012-09-13 13:38           ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-14 20:32             ` Khalid Aziz
2012-09-20  7:49               ` Eric W. Biederman
2012-09-21 22:50                 ` Khalid Aziz
2012-09-12  2:35         ` Dave Young
2012-10-18  3:12           ` Dave Young
2012-10-18 14:59             ` Khalid Aziz
2012-10-22  2:05               ` Dave Young
2012-09-06 20:24   ` Vivek Goyal
2012-09-07 14:32     ` Khalid Aziz

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=5048E40E.7040003@hp.com \
    --to=khalid.aziz@hp.com \
    --cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
    --cc=horms@verge.net.au \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=vgoyal@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.