From: Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>
To: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Cc: qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@au1.ibm.com>,
aik@au1.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] ppc: spapr-rtas - implement os-term rtas call
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 13:32:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53AAB335.1070608@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87zjh1ns91.fsf@abhimanyu.in.ibm.com>
On 25.06.14 13:27, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> writes:
>
>> On 25.06.14 06:36, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
>>> Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 17.06.14 11:59, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
>>>>>> Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> writes:
>>>>>>> On 17.06.14 11:30, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
>>>>>>>> Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de> writes:
>>>>>>>>>> + spapr_rtas_register("ibm,os-term", rtas_ibm_os_term);
>>>>>>>>>> + spapr_rtas_register("ibm,extended-os-term", rtas_ibm_ext_os_term);
>>>>>>>>> Why do we need the extended-os-term if we don't do anything with it?
>>>>>>>> Linux kernel checks for both of them because of legacy:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> arch/powerpc/kernel/rtas.c:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> void rtas_os_term(char *str)
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>> /*
>>>>>>>> * Firmware with the ibm,extended-os-term property is guaranteed
>>>>>>>> * to always return from an ibm,os-term call. Earlier versions without
>>>>>>>> * this property may terminate the partition which we want to avoid
>>>>>>>> * since it interferes with panic_timeout.
>>>>>>> But we do not return from the RTAS call, so we don't adhere to the
>>>>>>> extended semantics?
>>>>>> But you would return without calling os-term call if
>>>>>> ibm,extended-os-term isnt registered. For that reason I h ave defined a
>>>>>> stub.
>>>>> I appreciate the hacker mentality, but Linux explicitly checks on
>>>>> ibm,extended-os-term to ensure that the hypervisor does not stop the VM
>>>>> when it calls ibm,os-term. However, the implementation above does stop
>>>>> the VM when the guest calls ibm,os-term.
>>>> Seems to be added to do just that:
>>>>
>>>> commit e9bbc8cde0e3c33b42ddbe1b02108cb5c97275eb
>>>> Author: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
>>>> Date: Thu Feb 18 12:11:51 2010 +0000
>>>>
>>>> powerpc/pseries: Call ibm,os-term if the ibm,extended-os-term is present
>>>>
>>>> We have had issues in the past with ibm,os-term initiating shutdown of a
>>>> partition. This is confusing to the user, especially if panic_timeout is
>>>> non zero.
>>>>
>>>> The temporary fix was to avoid calling ibm,os-term if a panic_timeout was set
>>>> and since we set it on every boot we basically never call ibm,os-term.
>>>>
>>>> An extended version of ibm,os-term has since been implemented which gives us
>>>> the behaviour we want:
>>>>
>>>> "When the platform supports extended ibm,os-term behavior, the return to the
>>>> RTAS will always occur unless there is a kernel assisted dump active as
>>>> initiated by an ibm,configure-kernel-dump call."
>>>>
>>>> This patch checks for the ibm,extended-os-term property and calls ibm,os-term
>>>> if it exists.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
>>> I was thinking of the following:
>>>
>>> 1) Return the RTAS unsupported for extended-os-term
>>> 2) A comment in the beginning of the function to suggest that this is a
>>> stub need for legacy of PowerVM
>>>
>>> Please let me know your thoughts.
>> I think we need to clarify what bug Anton was trying to fix. The
>> implementation you're proposing for os-term may "initiate a shutdown
>> of a partition", albeit a hard stop usually. Is this what Linux is
>> trying to avoid?
> Let me put down my understanding:
>
> There are two possible way to handle kernel panic:
> 1) Kdump service running in guest - already working
> 2) Pass the kernel panic information to hypervisor - not there in Qemu
> pseries
>
> So without kdump service running, if linux kernel hits a panic, its going
> to check os-term and extended-os-term, only then its going to call
> os-term.
It's checking both for a reason. Find that reason.
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-25 11:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-12 12:09 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] ppc: spapr-rtas - implement os-term rtas call Nikunj A Dadhania
2014-06-17 9:13 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-17 9:30 ` Nikunj A Dadhania
2014-06-17 9:53 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-17 9:59 ` Nikunj A Dadhania
2014-06-17 10:02 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-17 10:19 ` Nikunj A Dadhania
2014-06-25 4:36 ` Nikunj A Dadhania
2014-06-25 11:03 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-25 11:27 ` Nikunj A Dadhania
2014-06-25 11:32 ` Alexander Graf [this message]
2014-06-26 7:55 ` Nikunj A Dadhania
2014-06-26 8:04 ` Alexander Graf
2014-06-26 9:05 ` Nikunj A Dadhania
2014-06-26 9:22 ` Alexander Graf
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=53AAB335.1070608@suse.de \
--to=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=aik@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=benh@au1.ibm.com \
--cc=nikunj@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.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).