From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill@shutemov.name>,
tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kexec@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Add restrictions for kexec/kdump jumping between 5-level and 4-level kernel
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2018 22:57:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180830145751.GC14702@192.168.1.2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180830142739.gfpa23nvex7xbkkf@black.fi.intel.com>
On 08/30/18 at 05:27pm, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 02:12:02PM +0000, Baoquan He wrote:
> > On 08/30/18 at 04:58pm, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:16:21PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> > > > This was suggested by Kirill several months ago, I worked out several
> > > > patches to fix, then interrupted by other issues. So sort them out
> > > > now and post for reviewing.
> > >
> > > Thanks for doing this.
> > >
> > > > The current upstream kernel supports 5-level paging mode and supports
> > > > dynamically choosing paging mode during bootup according to kernel
> > > > image, hardware and kernel parameter setting. This flexibility brings
> > > > several issues for kexec/kdump:
> > > > 1)
> > > > Switching between paging modes, requires changes into target kernel.
> > > > It means you cannot kexec() 4-level paging kernel from 5-level paging
> > > > kernel if 4-level paging kernel doesn't include changes.
> > > >
> > > > 2)
> > > > Switching from 5-level paging to 4-level paging kernel would fail, if
> > > > kexec() put kernel image above 64TiB of memory.
> > >
> > > I'm not entirely sure that 64TiB is the limit here. Technically, 4-level
> > > paging allows to address 256TiB in 1-to-1 mapping. We just don't have
> > > machines with that wide physical address space (which don't support
> > > 5-level paging too).
> >
> > Hmm, afaik, the MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS limits the maximum address space
> > which physical RAM can mapped to. We have 256TB for the whole address
> > space for 4-level paging, that includes user space and kernel space,
> > it might not allow 256TB entirely for the direct mapping.
> > And the direct mapping is only for physical RAM mapping, and
> > kexec/kdump only cares about the physical RAM space and load them
> > inside.
> >
> > # define MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS (pgtable_l5_enabled() ? 52 : 46)
> >
> > Not sure if my understanding is right, please correct me if I am wrong.
>
> IIRC, we only care about the place kexec puts the kernel before it gets
> decompressed. After the decompression kernel will be put into the right
> spot.
>
> Decompression is done in early boot where we use 1-to-1 mapping (not a
> usual kernel virtual memory layout). All 256TiB should be reachable.
My understanding that is although it's 1:1 identity mapping, it still
has to be inside available physical RAM region. I don't remember what
the old code did, now in __startup_64(), you can see that there's a
check like below, and at this time, it's still identity mapping.
/* Is the address too large? */
if (physaddr >> MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS)
for (;;);
Thanks
Baoquan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-08-30 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-08-29 14:16 [PATCH 0/3] Add restrictions for kexec/kdump jumping between 5-level and 4-level kernel Baoquan He
2018-08-29 14:16 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86/boot: Add bit fields into xloadflags for 5-level kernel checking Baoquan He
2018-09-04 2:41 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-09-04 3:44 ` Baoquan He
2018-09-04 4:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-09-04 5:20 ` Baoquan He
2018-09-04 5:46 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-09-04 6:06 ` Baoquan He
2018-09-04 6:36 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-09-04 7:16 ` Baoquan He
2018-09-04 8:42 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-09-05 4:06 ` H. Peter Anvin
2018-09-05 8:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-26 7:54 ` Baoquan He
2018-08-29 14:16 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86/kexec/64: Error out if try to jump to old 4-level kernel from 5-level kernel Baoquan He
2018-08-29 14:16 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86/kdump/64: Change the upper limit of crashkernel reservation Baoquan He
2018-08-30 13:50 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-08-30 14:13 ` Baoquan He
2018-08-30 13:58 ` [PATCH 0/3] Add restrictions for kexec/kdump jumping between 5-level and 4-level kernel Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-08-30 14:12 ` Baoquan He
2018-08-30 14:27 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
2018-08-30 14:57 ` Baoquan He [this message]
2018-08-30 15:01 ` Baoquan He
2018-09-02 20:45 ` Kirill A. Shutemov
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=20180830145751.GC14702@192.168.1.2 \
--to=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kirill@shutemov.name \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@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