From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To: Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@gmail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
yinghai@kernel.org, vgoyal@redhat.com, kexec@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] x86/kdump: bugfix, make the behavior of crashkernel=X consistent with kaslr
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 15:18:23 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181221071823.GA2526@MiWiFi-R3L-srv> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1544760446-506-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com>
On 12/14/18 at 12:07pm, Pingfan Liu wrote:
> Customer reported a bug on a high end server with many pcie devices, where
> kernel bootup with crashkernel=384M, and kaslr is enabled. Even
> though we still see much memory under 896 MB, the finding still failed
> intermittently. Because currently we can only find region under 896 MB,
> if w/0 ',high' specified. Then KASLR breaks 896 MB into several parts
> randomly, and crashkernel reservation need be aligned to 128 MB, that's
> why failure is found. It raises confusion to the end user that sometimes
> crashkernel=X works while sometimes fails.
> If want to make it succeed, customer can change kernel option to
> "crashkernel=384M, high". Just this give "crashkernel=xx@yy" a very
> limited space to behave even though its grammer looks more generic.
> And we can't answer questions raised from customer that confidently:
> 1) why it doesn't succeed to reserve 896 MB;
> 2) what's wrong with memory region under 4G;
> 3) why I have to add ',high', I only require 384 MB, not 3840 MB.
>
> This patch simplifies the method suggested in the mail [1]. It just goes
> bottom-up to find a candidate region for crashkernel. The bottom-up may be
> better compatible with the old reservation style, i.e. still want to get
> memory region from 896 MB firstly, then [896 MB, 4G], finally above 4G.
>
> There is one trivial thing about the compatibility with old kexec-tools:
> if the reserved region is above 896M, then old tool will fail to load
> bzImage. But without this patch, the old tool also fail since there is no
> memory below 896M can be reserved for crashkernel.
>
> [1]: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2017-October/019571.html
> Signed-off-by: Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@gmail.com>
> Cc: Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
> Cc: yinghai@kernel.org,
> Cc: vgoyal@redhat.com
> Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org
>
> ---
> v1->v2:
> improve commit log
> arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 9 ++++++---
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
This is a bug fix and urged by our customer.
I personally think crashkernel=xx@ is a generic synctax, the current
code making it search only under 896 MB seems not so reasonable.
Ack this patch.
Acked-by: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Thanks
Baoquan
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> index d494b9b..60f12c4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -541,15 +541,18 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
>
> /* 0 means: find the address automatically */
> if (crash_base <= 0) {
> + if (!memblock_bottom_up())
> + memblock_set_bottom_up(true);
> /*
> * Set CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX upper bound for crash memory,
> * as old kexec-tools loads bzImage below that, unless
> * "crashkernel=size[KMG],high" is specified.
> */
> crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(CRASH_ALIGN,
> - high ? CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX
> - : CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX,
> - crash_size, CRASH_ALIGN);
> + (max_pfn * PAGE_SIZE), crash_size, CRASH_ALIGN);
> + if (!memblock_bottom_up())
> + memblock_set_bottom_up(false);
> +
> if (!crash_base) {
> pr_info("crashkernel reservation failed - No suitable area found.\n");
> return;
> --
> 2.7.4
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-12-21 7:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-12-14 4:07 [PATCHv2] x86/kdump: bugfix, make the behavior of crashkernel=X consistent with kaslr Pingfan Liu
2018-12-21 7:18 ` Baoquan He [this message]
2018-12-21 7:27 ` Baoquan He
2018-12-26 1:47 ` Dave Young
2018-12-27 2:57 ` Pingfan Liu
2018-12-26 1:57 ` Dave Young
2018-12-27 2:55 ` Pingfan Liu
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=20181221071823.GA2526@MiWiFi-R3L-srv \
--to=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=kernelfans@gmail.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=yinghai@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