From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8B54DC3DA41 for ; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 11:06:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:CC:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=alhEEo+X2Y+IeRT6JFcfqoD2HqUNjfhqJe39Z0FhVN8=; b=mATQKtdH/G/Qhak8R6xewjUXYt uzIb1kZG7g0/xd+wozMLqN9zJtHu/uiU60qhuG5axic85v1bIF7AUOMhqbGJQPnM1yfhhYl21ni+a NwFxZj5qkhrLOwp1cqO0s/Qlu1zIwUZMgXklvyP6dhY/s7DPvw/e9G/87zdMCyOXUzCzserNrFrXT RInF5xYvQV6pFVjYSln2gSchY8buBZksw3oGFuO7xWSG8/tLXBqq+PvIG9nZ4np3JlAIsQ46Btl/9 1icO1UjXrCjj7tc+H5Vy6KK4kaVY6nWZCXYbdwBfdm77EsIXjgTndX4GzmiKkMtwqgtUAP6ABJ3VQ EFvkLg9A==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sR8g6-00000006v6H-2fcw; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 11:06:34 +0000 Received: from szxga02-in.huawei.com ([45.249.212.188]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sR8fp-00000006uyy-2TWx; Tue, 09 Jul 2024 11:06:20 +0000 Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.19.88.105]) by szxga02-in.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTP id 4WJJ7Y6nVDzcpHh; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 19:05:45 +0800 (CST) Received: from kwepemi100008.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.221.188.57]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA4E31400D1; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 19:06:11 +0800 (CST) Received: from [10.67.109.254] (10.67.109.254) by kwepemi100008.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.57) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Tue, 9 Jul 2024 19:06:10 +0800 Message-ID: <01869981-b1de-32cb-bd25-d6ea09752b3d@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2024 19:06:09 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.2.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] ARM: Use generic interface to simplify crashkernel reservation Content-Language: en-US To: Baoquan He CC: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20240708133348.3592667-1-ruanjinjie@huawei.com> <3157befe-431f-69ac-b9d3-7a8685ba3a4d@huawei.com> From: Jinjie Ruan In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.67.109.254] X-ClientProxiedBy: dggems702-chm.china.huawei.com (10.3.19.179) To kwepemi100008.china.huawei.com (7.221.188.57) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240709_040617_846255_A9EDA1F1 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 11.58 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 2024/7/9 18:39, Baoquan He wrote: > On 07/09/24 at 05:50pm, Jinjie Ruan wrote: >> >> >> On 2024/7/9 17:29, Baoquan He wrote: >>> On 07/08/24 at 09:33pm, Jinjie Ruan wrote: >>>> Currently, x86, arm64, riscv and loongarch has been switched to generic >>>> crashkernel reservation. Also use generic interface to simplify crashkernel >>>> reservation for arm32, and fix two bugs by the way. >>> >>> I am not sure if this is a good idea. I added the generic reservation >>> itnerfaces for ARCH which support crashkernel=,high|low and normal >>> crashkernel reservation, with this, the code can be simplified a lot. >>> However, arm32 doesn't support crashkernel=,high, I am not sure if it's >>> worth taking the change, most importantly, if it will cause >>> misunderstanding or misoperation. >> >> Yes, arm32 doesn't support crashkernel=,high. >> >> However, a little enhancement to the generic code (please see the first >> patch), the generic reservation interfaces can also be applicable to >> architectures that do not support "high" such as arm32, and it can also >> simplify the code (please see the third patch). > > Yeah, I can see the code is simplified. When you specified > 'crashkernel=xM,high', do you think what should be warn out? Because > it's an unsupported syntax on arm32, we should do something to print out > appropriate message. Yes, you are right! In this patch it will print "crashkernel high memory reservation failed." message and out for arm32 if you specify 'crashkernel=xM,high because "CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX" and "CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX" is identical for arm32. And it should also warn out for other similar architecture. > >