[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d789bd84-a982-b8bb-ee24-6a7fcdf8221d@suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2018 12:36:34 +0200
From: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/speculation/l1tf: suggest what to do on systems with
too much RAM
On 08/24/2018 09:32 AM, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
> On 08/23/2018 09:27 PM, Michal Hocko wrote:
>> On Thu 23-08-18 16:28:12, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
>>> Two users have reported [1] that they have an "extremely unlikely" system
>>> with more than MAX_PA/2 memory and L1TF mitigation is not effective. Let's
>>> make the warning more helpful by suggesting the proper mem=X kernel boot param,
>>> a rough calculation of how much RAM can be lost (not precise if there's holes
>>> between MAX_PA/2 and max_pfn in the e820 map) and a link to the L1TF document
>>> to help decide if the mitigation is worth the unusable RAM.
>>>
>>> [1] https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1105536
>>>
>>> Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
>>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>>> Signed-off-by: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>
>>
>> I wouldn't bother with max_pfn-half_pa part but other than that this is
>> much more useful than the original message.
>
> Right, and it causes build failures on some configs.
>
>> Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
>
> Thanks! Here's a v2:
Just realized that kvm printk's refer to the online version at
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/admin-guide/l1tf.html
which should be easier for the users of distro kernels, should I change
that?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists