Re: [PATCH Resend] ARM: kdump: makes second kernel use strict pfn_valid

[AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>]

Wang, Will

I'm now working on kdump support for arm64 on top of Geoff's kexec patch.

On 05/20/2014 12:22 PM, Wang Nan wrote:
> On 2014/5/20 0:09, Will Deacon wrote:
>> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 02:54:03AM +0100, Wang Nan wrote:
>>> When SPARSEMEM and CRASH_DUMP both selected, simple pfn_valid prevents
>>> the second kernel ioremap first kernel's memory if the address falls
>>> into second kernel section. This limitation requires the second kernel
>>> occupies a full section, and elfcorehdr must resides in another section.
>>>
>>> This patch makes crash dump kernel use strict pfn_valid, removes such
>>> limitation.
>>>
>>> For example:
>>>
>>>    For a platform with SECTION_SIZE_BITS == 28 (256MiB) and
>>>    crashkernel=128M@0x28000000 in kernel cmdline, the second
>>>    kernel is loaded at 0x28000000. Kexec puts elfcorehdr at
>>>    0x2ff00000, and passes 'elfcorehdr=0x2ff00000 mem=130048K' to
>>>    second kernel. When second kernel start, it tries to use
>>>    ioremap to retrive its elfcorehrd. In this case, elfcodehdr is at the
>>>    same section of the second kernel, pfn_valid will recongnize
>>>    the page as valid, so ioremap will refuse to map it.
>>
>> So isn't the issue here that you're passing an incorrect mem= parameter
>> to the crash kernel?
>>
>
> mem= parameter is generated by kexec-tools according to /proc/iomem, it is the size
> of reserved memory minus 1MiB. So I think what you mean is I passing an incorrect
> crashkernel= parameter?

Just FYI, kexec-tools doesn't seem to be implemented in proper way to support device-tree.
Once device-tree is handled correctly, we don't need to pass "mem=" parameter.
(Of course, only on machines that support device-tree.)

> I'll explain limitations on crash kernel reserved memory in the case of SPARSEMEM
> enabled, and show how *impractical* the 'correct' crashkernel will be.
>
> Use realview board for example.
>
> Limitation 1: crash kernel reservation kernel must be aligned with 0x08000000 (128MiB).
>
>    This is because zImage determine final kernel address by (pc & 0xf8000000). If,
>    for example, set crashkernel=64M@0x29000000, then the second kernel itself
>    overwrites first kernel's memory. We'll lost some memory in /proc/vmcore.
>
> Limitation 2: crash kernel must resides in different section with the first kernel.
>
>    This is because the second kernel use ioremap for accessing first kernel's memory,
>    and arm prevent a valid pfn be ioremapped. Which means a whole section must be reserved
>    for the secton kernel. On realview, which is 256MiB.
>
> Limitation 3: the last 1MiB of reserved memory must be ioremappable.
>
>    This is because the second kernel depeneds kexec-tools passing an elfheader as
>    'elfcorehdr' to instructs it generating /proc/vmcore. See fs/proc/vmcore.c. Kexec-tools
>    simply uses the last 1MiB for it. The second kernel use ioremap to access it, force
>    the header be put in another section.

We can avoid "Limitation 3" just by implementing arm's own elfcorehdr_read() with memcpy().
I can submit a patch, but can't test it for now.

-Takahiro AKASHI


> In realview board, the only possible correct setting should be 'crashkernel=257M@0x20000000'.
> However, realview has only 1GiB memory, crash kernel consumes a quarter plus 1MiB. In addition, even
> set this parameter, crash kernel is still unusable because:
>
>    crashkernel reservation failed - memory is in use (0x20000000)
>
>> Will
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>

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