From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Michael Holzheu <holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
ebiederm@xmission.com, hbabu@us.ibm.com,
mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com, oomichi@mxs.nes.nec.co.jp,
horms@verge.net.au, heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 0/9] kdump: Patch series for s390 support
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 10:19:43 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110718141943.GE31986@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1310997641.4427.10.camel@br98xy6r>
On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 04:00:41PM +0200, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> Hello Vivek,
>
> On Mon, 2011-07-18 at 08:31 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 05:43:23PM +0200, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> > > > Or in first step we can keep it even simpler. We can spin in infinite
> > > > loop
> > >
> > > Looping is probably not a good option in a hypervisor environment like
> > > we have it on s390. At least we should load a disabled wait PSW.
> >
> > What is "disabled wait PSW"?
>
> This is a PSW where interrupts are disabled and the wait bit is on. This
> ensures that the virtual CPU is stopped and does not consume any CPU
> time.
>
> > > > In your case I think you shall have to do little more so that second
> > > > kernel also seems some of the lower memory areas so that later swapping
> > > > of kernel can be done.
> > >
> > > After the swap the ELF header is contained in the same memory than the
> > > kdump kernel. When the kdump kernel starts, the ELF header has to be
> > > saved from being overwritten (as kernel and ramdisk). I get the address
> > > from the "elfcorehdr=" kernel parameter. How will I get the size?
> >
> > By parsing the ELF header. It will give you information about how many
> > program headers and notes are there, their sizes and locations etc.
>
> The only thing we need is the size of the preallocated header that is in
> kdump memory. All other architectures seem to pass this information
> somehow with different mechanisms to the kdump kernel (memmap kernel
> parameter, boot parameters, etc.). Why should *we* parse the ELF header?
ELF headers and memmap parameters are communicating two different pieces
of information to second kenrel.
- memap tells what memory second kernel can use to boot.
- ELF headers tell what memory areas first kernel was using and using
that information how to construct ELF headers for /proc/vmcore interface
in second kernel. On x86, ELF headers also communicate where the saved
cpu state is for the first kernel.
Arch independent code in kdump kenrel (fs/proc/vmcore.c) is parsing those
ELF headers to export /proc/vmcore. So if you set up the headers right
you get that arch independent code for free without any changes to generic
code.
*Why should you not try to use what is avaialble already*
>
> > When kexec-tools loads ELF headers, it knows what's the total size of
> > ELF headers and it removes that chunk of memory from the memory map
> > passed to second kernel with memmap= options. IOW, some memory out
> > of reserved region is not usable by second kernel because we have
> > stored information in that memory. Kdump kernel maps that memory and
> > gets to read the ELF headers.
> >
> > So you shall have to do something similar where you need to tell second
> > kernel what memory areas it can use for boot and remove ELF header
> > memory area from the map.
>
> So if we do that, why should we parse the ELF header?
To know three things.
- Memory areas being used by first kernel.
- Cpu states at the time of crash of first kernel.
- Some config options exported by first kernel with the help of ELF notes.
fs/proc/vmcore.c already does it for you. You just need to make sure that
you tell it following.
- Where to find the headers in memory (elfcorehdr=)
- A way to map that memory and access contents.
- Make sure these headers are not overwritten by newly booted kernel.
[..]
> > It is possible. Even in x86, we prepare a block of information, one
> > 4K page and fill lots of x86 boot protocol information.
> >
> > Look at.
> >
> > kexec-tools/include/x86/x86-linux.h
> > kexec-tools/kexec/arch/i386/x86-linux-setup.c
> >
> > Above header information contains information about e820 memory map also
> > and we fill that map info for normal kexec (fastboot, not kdump) also and
> > that's how second kernel comes to know about memory map of system.
> >
> > I think one could possibly truncate the same map for kdump kernel to
> > tell second kernel about the memory to use. But IIRC, original memory
> > map is also used to determine max_pfn present in first kernel so that
> > in second kernel we don't try to map a memory beyond that and access
> > it, etc. Hence it was decided to leave it that way and pass the memory
> > map for second kernel on command line.
> >
> > So its possible that IA64 is doing preparing boot protocal specific
> > block and passing all the releavant information in that block instead
> > of making use of commnad line.
>
> Just to come back to your initial argumentation against our meminfo
> approach: It looks like that there are already other mechanisms besides
> of ELF-header and kernel parameters to pass information to the kdump
> kernel. Where is the conceptional difference to our meminfo interface?
That's well defined boot-loader and kernel protocol to on x86. kexec-tools
is just another boot loader and it uses that block to fill the information
a normal boot loader will do.
So if you have s390 specific boot loader/kernel protocol and if you extend
that, I think that should still be fine. Just keep the code in kexec-tools
for filling up the information which s390 specific code can parse. In
that case we should not require any generic changes to either kexec-tools
or kernel code. All the protocol specific details should be well hidden
in arch specific code.
Thanks
Vivek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-07-18 14:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-07-04 17:09 [patch 0/9] kdump: Patch series for s390 support Michael Holzheu
2011-07-04 17:09 ` [patch 1/9] kdump: Add KEXEC_CRASH_CONTROL_MEMORY_LIMIT Michael Holzheu
2011-07-04 17:09 ` [patch 2/9] kdump: Add machine_kexec_finish() Michael Holzheu
2011-07-04 17:09 ` [patch 3/9] kdump: Make kimage_load_crash_segment() weak Michael Holzheu
2011-07-04 17:09 ` [patch 4/9] kdump: Initialize vmcoreinfo note at startup Michael Holzheu
2011-07-04 17:09 ` [patch 5/9] kdump: Allow vmcore ELF header to be created in new kernel Michael Holzheu
2011-07-04 17:09 ` [patch 6/9] kdump: Merge set_vmcore_list_offsets_elf_32/64() Michael Holzheu
2011-07-04 17:09 ` [patch 7/9] kdump: Trigger kdump via panic notifier chain on s390 Michael Holzheu
2011-07-04 17:09 ` [patch 8/9] s390: kdump backend code Michael Holzheu
2011-07-04 17:09 ` [patch 9/9] kexec-tools: Add s390 kdump support Michael Holzheu
2011-07-05 20:26 ` [patch 0/9] kdump: Patch series for s390 support Vivek Goyal
2011-07-06 9:24 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-07 19:33 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-08 9:01 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-07-11 14:42 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-11 15:56 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-07-13 16:02 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-13 16:46 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-07-13 16:59 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-13 17:19 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-13 20:00 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-14 7:18 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-07-14 17:55 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-14 18:05 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-15 14:21 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-15 14:38 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-15 15:43 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-18 12:31 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-18 14:00 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-18 14:19 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2011-07-18 14:44 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-18 15:25 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-18 18:03 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-19 15:04 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-20 8:00 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-07-20 9:28 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-20 20:24 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-20 19:25 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-21 14:58 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-21 21:22 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-22 9:33 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-25 16:02 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-26 9:44 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-22 15:26 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-25 18:07 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-26 9:32 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-15 13:56 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-15 14:18 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-18 13:57 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2011-07-08 13:04 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-11 15:36 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-12 17:29 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-08 14:02 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-11 14:07 ` Vivek Goyal
2011-07-11 15:06 ` Michael Holzheu
2011-07-09 17:58 ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2011-07-12 13:52 ` Vivek Goyal
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=20110718141943.GE31986@redhat.com \
--to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=hbabu@us.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=oomichi@mxs.nes.nec.co.jp \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.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