Re: Bug report: kernel paniced when system hibernates

Conor Dooley
2023-05-25T13:38:38Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1569 bytes --]

On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 06:51:28PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:

> > We should only rely on this node name for known bad versions of opensbi
> > IMO. Going forward, if something needs to be reserved for firmware, the
> > firmware should make sure that it is reserved by using the property for
> > that purpose :)

> There is no issue with OpenSBI since it does the right thing by marking
> memory as reserved in the DT. This real issue is with the kernel handling
> of reserved memory for hibernate.

I don't think we are talking about the same thing here. I meant the
no-map property which OpenSBI does not set.

> Like Atish mentioned, not just OpenSBI, there will be other entities
> (like TSM) or some other M-mode firmware which will also reserve
> memory in DT/ACPI so clearly kernel needs a SBI implementation
> independent way of handling reserved memory for hibernate.

> > > Another option is to use compatible string or label property to indicate
> > > that this memory region is not to be saved/restored during hibernation.
> > > This can be documented in RISC-V DT bindings as well as the booting guide
> > > doc that alex was talking about.
> >
> > Sure, a dt-binding for sbi reserved regions doesn't immediately sound
> > like an awful idea... But we still have to work around the borked
> > firmware - be that disabling hibernation or using the mmode_resv node
> > when we know that the version of OpenSBI is one of those with the
> > problem.

Did you skip over this? I was agreeing that defining a common binding for
sbi reserved regions was a good idea.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]