linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kexec based hibernation: a prototype of kexec multi-stage load

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]

Message-ID: <1210736275.23707.62.camel@caritas-dev.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 14 May 2008 11:37:55 +0800
From:	"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
CC:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, nigel@...el.suspend2.net,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec based hibernation: a prototype of kexec
	multi-stage load

On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 22:56 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
[...]
> > 
> > > Last time I tried the patches (V9) and kexec jump did not work for me. I
> > > was not getting timer interrupts in second kernel. Then I had to put 
> > > LAPIC and IOAPIC in legacy mode and then at one way jump started working.
> > > I am not sure how the next kernel boots for you without putting APICs
> > > in legacy mode. (Yet to make returning back to original kernel work
> > > using V9). 
> > 
> > Can normal kexec (without kexec jump) works without putting LAPIC and
> > IOAPIC in legacy mode? Does this mean we should put LAPIC and IOAPIC
> > into legacy mode before kexec and restore them after?
> > 
> 
> We do put LAPIC and IOAPIC in legacy mode in normal kexec. Look at 
> disable_IO_APIC() in native_machine_shutdown(). So I think we shall
> have to do the same thing in kexec jump code too.

OK. I will look at this.

> I went through above mail thread again where we were discussing what all
> information need to be passed between kernels.
> 
> Last time we enumerated three things.
> 
> - kernel entry/re-entry point for switch between kernels.
> - backup pages map for core filtering
> - Probably ELF core notes for saving hibernated image.
> 
> I think if we just implement the functionality so that one can switch
> back and forth between kernels (no hibernated image saving),then we probably
> need to pass around only kernel entry/re-entry point and nothing else and in
> your patches I think you are already doing using %edi.

Yes.

> So, IMHO, for first simple implementation, we don't have to pass around
> any data between kernels except entry point. (Please correct me if I am 
> wrong). Lets get that implementation in first and then we can get rest
> of the pieces in place.

Yes. Kernel entry/re-entry point is the only information need to be
communicated between kernels for just switching between them. So we can
focus on kexec jump patch firstly.

Best Regards,
Huang Ying

--
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/