From: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
To: Khalid Aziz <khalid.aziz@hp.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: Fri, 07 Sep 2012 16:56:13 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5049B6AD.9000304@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5048E40E.7040003@hp.com>
On 09/07/2012 01:57 AM, Khalid Aziz wrote:
> 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?
>
It's probably needed, but currently relevant implementation is not
ready especially efi init code for kdump. We can address this once it's ok.
I did some digging about the efi boot kdump in slackware with kernel
from latest linus tree. I'm surprise that kdump works even without these
"noefi" and "acpi_rsdp="
With fedora 17 3.4.3 kernel passing "acpi_rsdp=" is enough for kdump
kernel booting.
Actually in x86 setup code if bootloader do not pass correct efi_info in
boot_params efi_enabled will be set to 0 automaticlly.
So as for this patch 'noefi' is not needed.
I will do more testing to see why linus tree works without "acpi_rsdp="
--
Thanks
Dave
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-09-07 9:00 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
2012-09-07 8:56 ` Dave Young [this message]
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=5049B6AD.9000304@redhat.com \
--to=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=khalid.aziz@hp.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).