All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, horms@verge.net.au,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	vgoyal@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86 e820: Introduce memmap=resetusablemap for kdump usage
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 02:05:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6950516.1uefDuthAH@hammer82.arch.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAE9FiQWXcwagEb0jdFfdHvNcByNxtaLbvvoRC-jAppQmiGS22w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 08:07:19 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:32 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> >>> Again: Please explain what is bad with this solution.
> >>> I cannot see a better and more robust way for kdump other than
> >>> reserving the original reserved memory areas as declared by the BIOS.
> >> 
> >> It is bad because it creates more complexity than is needed.
> >> 
> >> The whole point is that what we want is simply to switch type 1 to type
> >> X, with the sole exceptions being the areas explicitly reserved for the
> >> kdump kernel.
> > 
> > Do you prefer to  "reserveram" way in attached patch?
> 
> Hi, Thomas,
> 
> Can you please check attached reserveram version on your setup?
> 
> If it is ok, i will put it in for-x86-boot patchset and send it to
> Peter for v3.9.

But this (converting usable memory to reserved one before usable kdump memory
is added) will let machines run into problems again for which the check:
"mmconf area must be in reserved memory" got added?

If, then memory which was usable before has to be converted to a special
E820_KUMP (or whatever type) to make sure existing checks which look for
"is reserved memory" still work the same way as in a productive kernel.

Advantage of this would be that the info what originally was usable
memory is preserved and can be used in future kdump related patches.

So I guess the final patch should be:
   - Add a new e820 type:
        E820_KDUMP_RESERVED /* Originally usable memory where the crashed
                                                    kernel kernel resided in */
  - Use Yinghai's last posted patch, but instead of:
+			e820_update_range(0, ULLONG_MAX, E820_RAM,
+					  E820_RESERVED);
...
+			e820_remove_range(start_at, mem_size, E820_RESERVED, 0);
do:
+			e820_update_range(0, ULLONG_MAX, E820_RAM,
+					  E820_KDUMP_RESERVED);
...
+			e820_remove_range(start_at, mem_size, E820_KDUMP_RESERVED, 0);

  - Come up with another memmap=kdump_reserve_ram memmap option name
    or however it should get named...

If this proposal gets accepted, I can send a tested patch...

       Thomas

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

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, vgoyal@redhat.com, horms@verge.net.au,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86 e820: Introduce memmap=resetusablemap for kdump usage
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 02:05:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6950516.1uefDuthAH@hammer82.arch.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAE9FiQWXcwagEb0jdFfdHvNcByNxtaLbvvoRC-jAppQmiGS22w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wednesday, January 23, 2013 08:07:19 PM Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:06 PM, Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 8:32 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
> >>> Again: Please explain what is bad with this solution.
> >>> I cannot see a better and more robust way for kdump other than
> >>> reserving the original reserved memory areas as declared by the BIOS.
> >> 
> >> It is bad because it creates more complexity than is needed.
> >> 
> >> The whole point is that what we want is simply to switch type 1 to type
> >> X, with the sole exceptions being the areas explicitly reserved for the
> >> kdump kernel.
> > 
> > Do you prefer to  "reserveram" way in attached patch?
> 
> Hi, Thomas,
> 
> Can you please check attached reserveram version on your setup?
> 
> If it is ok, i will put it in for-x86-boot patchset and send it to
> Peter for v3.9.

But this (converting usable memory to reserved one before usable kdump memory
is added) will let machines run into problems again for which the check:
"mmconf area must be in reserved memory" got added?

If, then memory which was usable before has to be converted to a special
E820_KUMP (or whatever type) to make sure existing checks which look for
"is reserved memory" still work the same way as in a productive kernel.

Advantage of this would be that the info what originally was usable
memory is preserved and can be used in future kdump related patches.

So I guess the final patch should be:
   - Add a new e820 type:
        E820_KDUMP_RESERVED /* Originally usable memory where the crashed
                                                    kernel kernel resided in */
  - Use Yinghai's last posted patch, but instead of:
+			e820_update_range(0, ULLONG_MAX, E820_RAM,
+					  E820_RESERVED);
...
+			e820_remove_range(start_at, mem_size, E820_RESERVED, 0);
do:
+			e820_update_range(0, ULLONG_MAX, E820_RAM,
+					  E820_KDUMP_RESERVED);
...
+			e820_remove_range(start_at, mem_size, E820_KDUMP_RESERVED, 0);

  - Come up with another memmap=kdump_reserve_ram memmap option name
    or however it should get named...

If this proposal gets accepted, I can send a tested patch...

       Thomas

  reply	other threads:[~2013-01-29  1:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-01-22 15:20 [PATCH 0/2] Only parse exactmap once, introduce memmap=resetusablemap Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 15:20 ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 15:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86 e820: Check for exactmap appearance when parsing first memmap option Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 15:20   ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 19:33   ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-22 19:33     ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29  1:09   ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  1:09     ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  2:01     ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29  2:01       ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-22 15:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86 e820: Introduce memmap=resetusablemap for kdump usage Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 15:20   ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 15:54   ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-22 15:54     ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-22 16:23     ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 16:23       ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 16:32       ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-22 16:32         ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-22 20:06         ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-24  4:07           ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-24  4:07             ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29  1:05             ` Thomas Renninger [this message]
2013-01-29  1:05               ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-29  1:11               ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  1:11                 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  2:10                 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29  2:10                   ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29  2:11                   ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  2:11                     ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  2:19                     ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29  2:19                       ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29  2:20                       ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  2:20                         ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  2:27                       ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  2:27                         ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  2:31                         ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29  2:31                           ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29  3:33                           ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  3:33                             ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29  9:47                   ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-29  9:47                     ` Thomas Renninger

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=6950516.1uefDuthAH@hammer82.arch.suse.de \
    --to=trenn@suse.de \
    --cc=horms@verge.net.au \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    --cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
    /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.