linux-kernel - Re: [Patch 8/8] kexec: allow to shrink reserved memory

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:	Fri, 21 Aug 2009 09:59:27 +0800
From:	Amerigo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:	KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>
Cc:	Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tony.luck@...el.com,
	linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	bernhard.walle@....de, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch 8/8] kexec: allow to shrink reserved memory

On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 09:34:52AM +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>On Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:15:56 +0800
>Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com> wrote:
>    
>> > The, problem is whether memmap is there or not. That's all.
>> > plz see init sequence and check there are memmap.
>> > If memory-for-crash is obtained via bootmem,
>> > Don't you try to free memory hole ?
>> >   
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> It looks like that mem_map has 'struct page' for the reserved memory, I 
>> checked my "early_node_map[] active PFN ranges" output, the reserved 
>> memory area for crash kernel is right in one range. Am I missing 
>> something here?
>> 
>> I don't know why that oops comes out, maybe because of no PTE for thoese 
>> pages?
>> 
>Hmm ? Could you show me the code you use ?

(Sorry that I reply to you with my gmail, my work email can't send out
this message, probably because one of the destinations is broken...
I am the same person, don't be confused. :-)

Sure. Below is it:

+    for (addr = end + 1; addr < crashk_res.end; addr += PAGE_SIZE) {
+        printk(KERN_DEBUG "PFN is valid? %d\n", pfn_valid(addr>>PAGE_SHIFT));
+        ClearPageReserved(virt_to_page(addr));
+        init_page_count(virt_to_page(addr));
+        free_page(addr);
+        totalram_pages++;
+    }


pfn_valid() returns 1, and oops happens at ClearPageReserved().
('addr' is right between crashk_res.start and crashk_res.end)

Thank you!
--
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/