From: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
To: Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <ljs@kernel.org>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <liam@infradead.org>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@kernel.org>,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
Baoquan He <baoquan.he@linux.dev>,
Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <nao.horiguchi@gmail.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, rmikey@meta.com, riel@surriel.com,
kernel-team@meta.com, Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec: keep the next kernel off hardware-poisoned pages
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 09:47:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <amogZHzDyp8lvrQG@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2vxz7bme80vm.fsf@kernel.org>
On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 01:57:01PM +0200, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28 2026, Breno Leitao wrote:
>
> > Memory failures (such as unrecoverable ECCs errors) are getting more and
> > more common. The kernel knows how to handle it while running, marking it
> > as poisoned (and SIGBUS user tasks).
> >
> > Poisoned memory is removed from the buddy allocator, but, not from
> > other places. A current problem is that kexec will load new kernel
> > on top of a bad/poisoned memory, which is undesirable.
> >
> > If the next kernel's image, initrd or purgatory lands on poisoned frame,
> > the relocation copy writes to the bad memory and the machine checks
> > during the kexec.
> >
> > Skip hardware-poisoned frames when placing segments: check them in the
> > kexec_file hole finder so it lays the next kernel down on good memory,
> > and reject a poisoned destination in sanity_check_segment_list() for
> > the kexec_load path, which cannot relocate.
>
> kexec_locate_mem_hole() uses kexec_alloc_contig() to try to find a
> contiguous range from CMA. If found, it uses that and skips relocation.
> Do you know if CMA tracks poisoned pages and skips allocating them?
>
> sanity_check_segment_list() will catch these anyway and error out, but
> would be nice if CMA can track poisoned pages in the first place.
> Anyway, that is out of scope for this patch, but something you might
> want to look into.
Good point, I understand CMA already avoids them: alloc_contig_range()
runs in PB_ISOLATE_MODE_CMA_ALLOC, where a HWPoison page counts as
unmovable, so isolation returns -EBUSY and cma_alloc() routes around it,
no?
> > --- a/kernel/kexec_file.c
> > +++ b/kernel/kexec_file.c
> > @@ -504,6 +504,13 @@ static int locate_mem_hole_top_down(unsigned long start, unsigned long end,
> > continue;
> > }
> >
> > + /* Avoid placing the next kernel on hardware-poisoned memory */
> > + if (range_contains_hwpoison(temp_start,
> > + temp_end - temp_start + 1)) {
> > + temp_start = temp_start - PAGE_SIZE;
>
> Sashiko complains about this
> https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260728-kexec_posioned-v1-1-160c81d180fe@debian.org:
>
> If we find a hardware-poisoned page within a large segment, does this loop in
> locate_mem_hole_top_down() cause a CPU soft lockup?
>
> Since temp_start is shifted by only PAGE_SIZE, the next iteration will call
> range_contains_hwpoison() again. As seen in mm/memory-failure.c, that
> function does a linear scan from the new start address:
>
> for (pfn = PHYS_PFN(start); pfn <= end_pfn; pfn++) {
> if (pfn_valid(pfn) && PageHWPoison(pfn_to_page(pfn)))
> return true;
> }
>
> This means we could rescan almost the entire segment over and over until it
> finally moves past the poisoned page. For a very large segment like a 512MB
> initrd, this would iterate billions of times without yielding.
>
> Could range_contains_hwpoison() return the address of the poisoned page so
> the hole finder can skip past it efficiently?
>
> Which does seem to make sense. Same problem below.
Agreed, that could be a real problem. Returning the poisoned page
address from range_contains_hwpoison() would work but feels awkward
for a predicate function.
Let me think through a cleaner approach.
Thanks for the review,
--breno
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-29 16:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-28 16:22 [PATCH] kexec: keep the next kernel off hardware-poisoned pages Breno Leitao
2026-07-29 9:33 ` Miaohe Lin
2026-07-29 10:17 ` Breno Leitao
2026-07-29 11:57 ` Pratyush Yadav
2026-07-29 16:47 ` Breno Leitao [this message]
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=amogZHzDyp8lvrQG@gmail.com \
--to=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=baoquan.he@linux.dev \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=kas@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=liam@infradead.org \
--cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=ljs@kernel.org \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=nao.horiguchi@gmail.com \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=pratyush@kernel.org \
--cc=riel@surriel.com \
--cc=rmikey@meta.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).