public inbox for kexec@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: HATAYAMA Daisuke <d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org, Cliff Wickman <cpw@sgi.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Not booting BSP in kdump kernel (Was: Re: 32TB kdump)
Date: Fri, 5 Jul 2013 11:21:15 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130705152115.GD10152@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51D4D802.3050503@jp.fujitsu.com>

On Thu, Jul 04, 2013 at 11:03:46AM +0900, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:

[..]
> >It took around 400 seconds to capture compressed dump on disk and out of
> >that 326 seconds were consumed by compression only. Around 80% of total
> >dump time in this case was attributed to compression.
> >
> >So this sounds like the next big fish to go after. Using lzo and
> >snappy might help a bit. But I think bringing up more cpus in second
> >kernel should help too.
> >
> >What's the status of your patches to bring up multiple cpus in kdump
> >kernel. Are you planning to push these upstream?
> >
> 
> My next patch is the same as in diff:
> 
> http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1210.2/00014.html
> 
> Now there's need to compare the idea with Eric's suggestion that unsets BSP flag from boot cpu
> at the boot time of 1st kernel, which is very simpler than the idea of mine. However,
> HPA pointed out that the Eric's idea could affect some sort of firmware.
> I'm investigating that now.
> 
> Candidates I've found so far is ACPI firmware. ACPI specification describes that in FADT part,
> SMI_CMD and other SMI releated commands need to be called on boot processor, i.e. cpu with BSP
> flag; See Table 5-34 in ACPI spec 5.0. I associate this to restriction of cpu hotplug that boot
> processor cannot be physically removed. Also, there's comment in __acpi_os_execute():
> 
>         /*
>          * On some machines, a software-initiated SMI causes corruption unless
>          * the SMI runs on CPU 0.  An SMI can be initiated by any AML, but
>          * typically it's done in GPE-related methods that are run via
>          * workqueues, so we can avoid the known corruption cases by always
>          * queueing on CPU 0.
>          */
>         ret = queue_work_on(0, queue, &dpc->work);
> 
> But I don't know whether the SMI requires even BSP flag set or not. I need suggestion from
> experts around this field.
> 
> I'll post the patch next week and send cc to some experts in order to fill the patch
> description with concrete description about what kind of firmware is affected by unsetting
> BSP flag.

Ok. BTW, did clearing BSP flag work for you experimentally? Hpa mentioned
that it did not for Fenghua.

To me looking into ACPI/MP tables to figure out which is BSP and not
bringing up that cpu sounds simple and one does not have to worry
about dealing with side affects of clearing BSP bit, if any.

CCing Eric to figure out if he is particular about clearing BSP bit
solution or is willing to accept the solution of booting N-1 cpus
in kdump kernel by not bringing up BSP.

Thanks
Vivek

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

  reply	other threads:[~2013-07-05 15:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-21 14:17 32TB kdump Cliff Wickman
2013-06-27 21:17 ` Vivek Goyal
2013-06-28 21:56   ` Cliff Wickman
2013-07-01  0:42     ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-07-01  2:57     ` Atsushi Kumagai
2013-07-01 16:12     ` Vivek Goyal
2013-07-01  0:55   ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-07-01 16:06     ` Vivek Goyal
     [not found]       ` <51D3D15D.5090600@jp.fujitsu.com>
2013-07-03 13:03         ` Vivek Goyal
2013-07-04  2:03           ` HATAYAMA Daisuke
2013-07-05 15:21             ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2013-07-08  9:23               ` Not booting BSP in kdump kernel (Was: Re: 32TB kdump) HATAYAMA Daisuke

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=20130705152115.GD10152@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=cpw@sgi.com \
    --cc=d.hatayama@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox