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 BA310C433EF for ; Thu, 5 May 2022 14:21:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=Nf5aZbEoa/qmZvmVP/36/NTLpepCsc+NVQwC2oPlB/M=; b=fKXDFecyXhwBJx qUWXMQVATGcx0zouZOChWbkyXY4xqYVGte/nR3eQ4R9HQsC9P04TbdmovUKLz36CV3LJ2qS49P+LW lcA+00uqWGpdp5fI8BC3znokakCzZLz8nBF9d+OE1Pchu4/eA0mTngYht/bsBT3fM4HJqRvln6PDX cCbHC5Go+iY0YX+43gpBSjYahtOK9periXvdkw8E+BVSeTcMWuEzmQp/xYrRI/tM/HG8aZtwYbwqR UfSaoUc1R1i8N/cmJts5N07L0+WxgTImZPSIKbHvHhcSFwc8aWrrnQcWEupmCG4ndNcgrqVbsgAd5 c1ckOuLKPhr5Kenf8Utw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nmcLK-00GLHJ-Oa; Thu, 05 May 2022 14:20:34 +0000 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org ([145.40.68.75]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nmcLF-00GLER-GZ; Thu, 05 May 2022 14:20:31 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5BC9B82B7A; Thu, 5 May 2022 14:20:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 55907C385A4; Thu, 5 May 2022 14:20:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 15:20:18 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Baoquan He Cc: "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , x86@kernel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Young , Vivek Goyal , Eric Biederman , kexec@lists.infradead.org, Will Deacon , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Rob Herring , Frank Rowand , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Randy Dunlap , Feng Zhou , Kefeng Wang , Chen Zhou , John Donnelly , Dave Kleikamp Subject: Re: [PATCH v22 5/9] arm64: kdump: Reimplement crashkernel=X Message-ID: References: <3fc41a94-4247-40f3-14e7-f11e3001ec33@huawei.com> <23e2dcf4-4e9a-5298-d5d8-8761b0bbbe21@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220505_072029_923306_9A3E914B X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.52 ) 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: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Thu, May 05, 2022 at 11:00:19AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > On 05/03/22 at 11:00pm, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > So, to recap, IIUC you are fine with: > > > > crashkernel=Y - allocate within ZONE_DMA with fallback > > above with a default in ZONE_DMA (like > > x86, 256M or swiotlb size) > > Ack to this one. > > > > crashkernel=Y,high - allocate from above ZONE_DMA > > Not exactly. If there's only ZONE_DMA, crashkernel,high will > be reserved in ZONE_DMA, and crashkernel,low will be ignored. > Other than this, ack. Yes, that's fine. > > crashkernel=Y,low - allocate within ZONE_DMA > > Ack to this one. > > > > 'crashkernel' overrides the high and low while the latter two can be > > passed independently. > > crashkernel=,high can be passed independently, then a crashkernel=,low > is needed implicitly. If people don't want crashkernel=,low > explicitly, crashkernel=0,low need be specified. I find this complicating the interface. I don't know the background to the x86 implementation but we diverge already on arm64 since we talk about ZONE_DMA rather than 4G limit (though for most platforms these would be the same). I guess we could restate the difference between crashkernel= and crashkernel=,high as the hint to go for allocation above ZONE_DMA first. > An independent crashkernel=,low makes no sense. Crashkernel=,low > should be paird with crashkernel=,high. You could argue that crashkernel=,low gives the current crashkernel= behaviour, i.e. either all within ZONE_DMA or fail to allocate. So it may have some value on its own. > My personal opinion according to the existed senmantics on x86. > Otherwise, the guidance of crashkernel= |,high|,low reservation > will be complicated to write. It's more that I find the current semantics unnecessarily confusing. But even reading the x86_64 text it's not that clear. For example the default low allocation for crashkernel= and crashkernel=,high is only mentioned in the crashkernel=,low description. -- Catalin _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel