From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leizhen (ThunderTown) Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2022 14:19:18 +0800 Subject: [PATCH v20 2/5] arm64: kdump: introduce some macros for crash kernel reservation In-Reply-To: References: <20220124084708.683-1-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> <20220124084708.683-3-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com> <69da7ed5-4ef4-3655-8965-4181c7d7bf0b@huawei.com> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: kexec@lists.infradead.org On 2022/2/21 11:22, Baoquan He wrote: > On 02/14/22 at 02:22pm, Leizhen (ThunderTown) wrote: >> >> >> On 2022/2/11 18:39, Baoquan He wrote: >>> On 01/24/22 at 04:47pm, Zhen Lei wrote: >>>> From: Chen Zhou >>>> >>>> Introduce macro CRASH_ALIGN for alignment, macro CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX >>>> for upper bound of low crash memory, macro CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX for >>>> upper bound of high crash memory, use macros instead. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chen Zhou >>>> Signed-off-by: Zhen Lei >>>> Tested-by: John Donnelly >>>> Tested-by: Dave Kleikamp >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 11 ++++++++--- >>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >>>> index 90f276d46b93bc6..6c653a2c7cff052 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c >>>> @@ -65,6 +65,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(memstart_addr); >>>> phys_addr_t arm64_dma_phys_limit __ro_after_init; >>>> >>>> #ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC_CORE >>>> +/* Current arm64 boot protocol requires 2MB alignment */ >>>> +#define CRASH_ALIGN SZ_2M >>>> + >>>> +#define CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX arm64_dma_phys_limit >>>> +#define CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE >>> >>> MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE is obvoiously a alloc flag for memblock >>> allocator, I don't think it's appropriate to make HIGH_MAX get its value. >> >> Right, thanks. >> >>> You can make it as memblock.current_limit, or do not define it, but using >>> MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE direclty in memblock_phys_alloc_range() with >>> a code comment. >> >> This patch is not required at present. These macros are added to eliminate >> differences to share code with x86. > > So this patch may not be needed in this series. It can be added in > another post when you start to do the clean up and code unification > among ARCHes, with my udnerstanding. At that time you can consider how > to abstract the common code to handle the difference. Yes, it should be merged with the v20 3/5. > > . > -- Regards, Zhen Lei