From: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
Cc: Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>,
mark.rutland@arm.com, linux-efi@vger.kernel.org,
ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, geoff@infradead.org,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
matt@codeblueprint.co.uk, bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v24 5/9] arm64: kdump: add kdump support
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:25:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57BD7619.1040406@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160824080443.GA12902@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
Hi Dave,
On 24/08/16 09:04, Dave Young wrote:
> Looking the arm-init.c, I suspect it missed the some efi ranges as
> reserved ranges like runtime code and runtime data etc. But I might be
> wrong.
This had me confused for too... I think I get it, my understanding is:
> static __init int is_reserve_region(efi_memory_desc_t *md)
> {
> switch (md->type) {
> case EFI_LOADER_CODE:
> case EFI_LOADER_DATA:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA:
> case EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY:
> case EFI_PERSISTENT_MEMORY:
> return 0;
return false - this is the list of region-types to never reserve, regardless of
memory attributes.
> default:
> break;
> }
> return is_normal_ram(md);
If its not in the 'never reserve' list above, then we check if the region is
'normal' ram. If it is then it will end up in memblock.memory so we return true,
causing it to be marked nomap too.
reserve_regions() in that same file calls is_normal_ram() directly before adding
all regions with the WB attribute to memblock.memory via
early_init_dt_add_memory_arch().
A runtime region with the WB attribute will be caught by is_reserve_region(),
and is_normal_ram(), so it ends up in memblock.memory and memblock.nomap.
> }
>
> Let's see the x86 do_add_efi_mem_map, the default case set all other
> types as reserved. Shouldn't this be same in all arches though there's
> no e820 in arm(64)?
> static void __init do_add_efi_memmap(void)
> {
>
> [snip]
> switch (md->type) {
> case EFI_LOADER_CODE:
> case EFI_LOADER_DATA:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA:
> case EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY:
> if (md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_WB)
> e820_type = E820_RAM;
In this case reserve_regions() will add the memory to memblock.memory because it
has the WB attribute, and not reserve it.
> else
> e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
Without the WB attribute, these regions are in neither memblock.memory nor
memblock.nomap.
> break;
> [snip]
> default:
> /*
> * EFI_RESERVED_TYPE EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE
> * EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA
> * EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO
> * EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO_PORT_SPACE EFI_PAL_CODE
> */
> e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
> break;
If any other regions has the WB attribute, it will be added to memblock.memory
and memblock.nomap. If it doesn't, it will appear in neither.
> }
> [snip]
> }
Does this help at all?
Thanks,
James
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: James Morse <james.morse-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>
To: Dave Young <dyoung-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Pratyush Anand <panand-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
AKASHI Takahiro
<takahiro.akashi-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
catalin.marinas-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org,
will.deacon-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org,
geoff-wEGCiKHe2LqWVfeAwA7xHQ@public.gmane.org,
bauerman-23VcF4HTsmIX0ybBhKVfKdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org,
mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org,
kexec-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org,
matt-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org,
linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v24 5/9] arm64: kdump: add kdump support
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:25:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57BD7619.1040406@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160824080443.GA12902-0VdLhd/A9Pl+NNSt+8eSiB/sF2h8X+2i0E9HWUfgJXw@public.gmane.org>
Hi Dave,
On 24/08/16 09:04, Dave Young wrote:
> Looking the arm-init.c, I suspect it missed the some efi ranges as
> reserved ranges like runtime code and runtime data etc. But I might be
> wrong.
This had me confused for too... I think I get it, my understanding is:
> static __init int is_reserve_region(efi_memory_desc_t *md)
> {
> switch (md->type) {
> case EFI_LOADER_CODE:
> case EFI_LOADER_DATA:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA:
> case EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY:
> case EFI_PERSISTENT_MEMORY:
> return 0;
return false - this is the list of region-types to never reserve, regardless of
memory attributes.
> default:
> break;
> }
> return is_normal_ram(md);
If its not in the 'never reserve' list above, then we check if the region is
'normal' ram. If it is then it will end up in memblock.memory so we return true,
causing it to be marked nomap too.
reserve_regions() in that same file calls is_normal_ram() directly before adding
all regions with the WB attribute to memblock.memory via
early_init_dt_add_memory_arch().
A runtime region with the WB attribute will be caught by is_reserve_region(),
and is_normal_ram(), so it ends up in memblock.memory and memblock.nomap.
> }
>
> Let's see the x86 do_add_efi_mem_map, the default case set all other
> types as reserved. Shouldn't this be same in all arches though there's
> no e820 in arm(64)?
> static void __init do_add_efi_memmap(void)
> {
>
> [snip]
> switch (md->type) {
> case EFI_LOADER_CODE:
> case EFI_LOADER_DATA:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA:
> case EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY:
> if (md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_WB)
> e820_type = E820_RAM;
In this case reserve_regions() will add the memory to memblock.memory because it
has the WB attribute, and not reserve it.
> else
> e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
Without the WB attribute, these regions are in neither memblock.memory nor
memblock.nomap.
> break;
> [snip]
> default:
> /*
> * EFI_RESERVED_TYPE EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE
> * EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA
> * EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO
> * EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO_PORT_SPACE EFI_PAL_CODE
> */
> e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
> break;
If any other regions has the WB attribute, it will be added to memblock.memory
and memblock.nomap. If it doesn't, it will appear in neither.
> }
> [snip]
> }
Does this help at all?
Thanks,
James
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: james.morse@arm.com (James Morse)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v24 5/9] arm64: kdump: add kdump support
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 11:25:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <57BD7619.1040406@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160824080443.GA12902@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
Hi Dave,
On 24/08/16 09:04, Dave Young wrote:
> Looking the arm-init.c, I suspect it missed the some efi ranges as
> reserved ranges like runtime code and runtime data etc. But I might be
> wrong.
This had me confused for too... I think I get it, my understanding is:
> static __init int is_reserve_region(efi_memory_desc_t *md)
> {
> switch (md->type) {
> case EFI_LOADER_CODE:
> case EFI_LOADER_DATA:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA:
> case EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY:
> case EFI_PERSISTENT_MEMORY:
> return 0;
return false - this is the list of region-types to never reserve, regardless of
memory attributes.
> default:
> break;
> }
> return is_normal_ram(md);
If its not in the 'never reserve' list above, then we check if the region is
'normal' ram. If it is then it will end up in memblock.memory so we return true,
causing it to be marked nomap too.
reserve_regions() in that same file calls is_normal_ram() directly before adding
all regions with the WB attribute to memblock.memory via
early_init_dt_add_memory_arch().
A runtime region with the WB attribute will be caught by is_reserve_region(),
and is_normal_ram(), so it ends up in memblock.memory and memblock.nomap.
> }
>
> Let's see the x86 do_add_efi_mem_map, the default case set all other
> types as reserved. Shouldn't this be same in all arches though there's
> no e820 in arm(64)?
> static void __init do_add_efi_memmap(void)
> {
>
> [snip]
> switch (md->type) {
> case EFI_LOADER_CODE:
> case EFI_LOADER_DATA:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_CODE:
> case EFI_BOOT_SERVICES_DATA:
> case EFI_CONVENTIONAL_MEMORY:
> if (md->attribute & EFI_MEMORY_WB)
> e820_type = E820_RAM;
In this case reserve_regions() will add the memory to memblock.memory because it
has the WB attribute, and not reserve it.
> else
> e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
Without the WB attribute, these regions are in neither memblock.memory nor
memblock.nomap.
> break;
> [snip]
> default:
> /*
> * EFI_RESERVED_TYPE EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_CODE
> * EFI_RUNTIME_SERVICES_DATA
> * EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO
> * EFI_MEMORY_MAPPED_IO_PORT_SPACE EFI_PAL_CODE
> */
> e820_type = E820_RESERVED;
> break;
If any other regions has the WB attribute, it will be added to memblock.memory
and memblock.nomap. If it doesn't, it will appear in neither.
> }
> [snip]
> }
Does this help at all?
Thanks,
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-24 10:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 117+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-09 1:52 [PATCH v24 0/9] arm64: add kdump support AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:52 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:52 ` [PATCH v24 1/9] arm64: kdump: reserve memory for crash dump kernel AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:52 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:55 ` [PATCH v24 2/9] memblock: add memblock_cap_memory_range() AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:55 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:55 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-10 16:26 ` James Morse
2016-08-10 16:26 ` James Morse
2016-08-10 16:26 ` James Morse
2016-08-09 1:56 ` [PATCH v24 3/9] arm64: limit memory regions based on DT property, usable-memory-range AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` [PATCH v24 4/9] arm64: kdump: implement machine_crash_shutdown() AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` [PATCH v24 5/9] arm64: kdump: add kdump support AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-10 16:38 ` James Morse
2016-08-10 16:38 ` James Morse
2016-08-10 18:18 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-10 18:18 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-11 10:03 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-11 10:03 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-16 10:13 ` James Morse
2016-08-16 10:13 ` James Morse
2016-08-17 15:33 ` [PATCH] fixup! " James Morse
2016-08-17 15:33 ` James Morse
2016-08-18 7:32 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-18 7:32 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-19 8:00 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-19 8:00 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-19 13:34 ` James Morse
2016-08-19 13:34 ` James Morse
2016-08-19 15:19 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-19 15:19 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-18 7:15 ` [PATCH v24 5/9] " AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-18 7:15 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-18 7:19 ` Dave Young
2016-08-18 7:19 ` Dave Young
2016-08-19 1:26 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-19 1:26 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-19 11:22 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-19 11:22 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-22 1:29 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-22 1:29 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-22 7:07 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-22 7:07 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-22 13:47 ` James Morse
2016-08-22 13:47 ` James Morse
2016-08-23 0:38 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-23 0:38 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-23 11:23 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-23 11:23 ` Pratyush Anand
2016-08-24 8:04 ` Dave Young
2016-08-24 8:04 ` Dave Young
2016-08-24 8:04 ` Dave Young
2016-08-24 10:25 ` James Morse [this message]
2016-08-24 10:25 ` James Morse
2016-08-24 10:25 ` James Morse
2016-08-25 1:04 ` Dave Young
2016-08-25 1:04 ` Dave Young
2016-08-25 1:04 ` Dave Young
2016-08-19 13:28 ` James Morse
2016-08-19 13:28 ` James Morse
2016-08-22 1:23 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-22 1:23 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-24 14:44 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-08-24 14:44 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2016-08-26 6:22 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-26 6:22 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` [PATCH v24 6/9] arm64: kdump: add VMCOREINFO's for user-space coredump tools AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` [PATCH v24 7/9] arm64: kdump: enable kdump in the arm64 defconfig AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` [PATCH v24 8/9] arm64: kdump: update a kernel doc AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:56 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:57 ` [PATCH v24 9/9] Documentation: dt: chosen properties for arm64 kdump AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:57 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 1:57 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-19 13:26 ` Rob Herring
2016-08-19 13:26 ` Rob Herring
2016-08-19 13:26 ` Rob Herring
2016-08-22 4:28 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-22 4:28 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-22 4:28 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-30 16:34 ` Rob Herring
2016-08-30 16:34 ` Rob Herring
2016-08-30 16:34 ` Rob Herring
2016-08-30 23:45 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-30 23:45 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-30 23:45 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-31 5:02 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-31 5:02 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-31 5:02 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-02 10:11 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-02 10:11 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-02 10:11 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-27 23:39 ` Mark Rutland
2016-09-27 23:39 ` Mark Rutland
2016-09-27 23:39 ` Mark Rutland
2016-08-09 2:04 ` [PATCH v24 0/9] arm64: add kdump support AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-09 2:04 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-31 3:41 ` Manish Jaggi
2016-08-31 3:41 ` Manish Jaggi
2016-08-31 5:31 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-08-31 5:31 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-02 12:53 ` Manish Jaggi
2016-09-02 12:53 ` Manish Jaggi
2016-09-05 8:15 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-05 8:15 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-09-05 12:42 ` Manish Jaggi
2016-09-05 12:42 ` Manish Jaggi
2016-09-06 15:33 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-09-06 15:33 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-09-06 16:15 ` Manish Jaggi
2016-09-06 16:15 ` Manish Jaggi
2016-09-06 16:42 ` Marc Zyngier
2016-09-06 16:42 ` Marc Zyngier
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=57BD7619.1040406@arm.com \
--to=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
--cc=bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=geoff@infradead.org \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-efi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=matt@codeblueprint.co.uk \
--cc=panand@redhat.com \
--cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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.