lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:26:19 -0800
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>
CC:	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, mingo@...e.hu,
	rdreier@...co.com, Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
	"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: kexec boot regression

Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>> Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>>>> Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>>>>>> Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> [PATCH] x86/pci: intel ioh bus num reg accessing fix
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> it is above 0x100, so if mmconf is not enable, need to skip it
>>>>>>>>> This works, it kexecs kernels fine. But since 2.6.32 doesn't have the
>>>>>>>>> mmconf problem to begin with, are we now just working around the issue?
>>>>>>>>> SRAT still reports issues, numa doesn't work.
>>>>>>>> that patch will be bullet proof... we need it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> also still need to figure out why memmap range is not passed properly.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> do you mean 2.6.32 kexec 2.6.32 it have worked mmconf and numa in
>>>>>>>> second kernel?
>>>>>>> Yes, 2.6.32 booted and 2.6.32 kexec'ed works just fine, no SRAT
>>>>>>> complaints and NUMA works fine.
>>>>>> do you need 
>>>>>> memmap=62G@4G
>>>>>> in this case?
>>>>> Yes, I've needed that always.
>>>> good,
>>>>
>>>> can you enable debug option in kexec to see why kexec can not pass
>>>> whole 38? range to second kernel?
>>> Not getting any output so far, -d doesn't do much. Poking around in the
>>> source...
>> OK, cold boot and kexec 2.0.1 gets all 39 ranges passed properly to
>> kexec'ed kernels. Since the older kexec stopped at range 30 (31 ranges
>> total), that smells like just a kexec bug. Retesting -git...
> 
> Current -git works fine when all the ranges are passed correctly. So, I
> think, the only existing regression is the SRAT issue.

did you change node_shift?

YH
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ