linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 5/5] kdump: update Documentation about crashkernel

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: <20200819120301.GA13727@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 19 Aug 2020 20:03:01 +0800
From:   Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To:     chenzhou <chenzhou10@...wei.com>
Cc:     catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, james.morse@....com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bhe@...hat.com,
        corbet@....net, John.P.donnelly@...cle.com,
        prabhakar.pkin@...il.com, bhsharma@...hat.com, horms@...ge.net.au,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, nsaenzjulienne@...e.de,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        guohanjun@...wei.com, xiexiuqi@...wei.com, huawei.libin@...wei.com,
        wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 5/5] kdump: update Documentation about crashkernel

On 08/18/20 at 03:07pm, chenzhou wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2020/8/10 14:03, Dave Young wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >>> Previously I remember we talked about to use similar logic as X86, but I
> >>> remember you mentioned on some arm64 platform there could be no low
> >>> memory at all.  Is this not a problem now for the fallback?  Just be
> >>> curious, thanks for the update, for the common part looks good.
> >> Hi Dave,
> >>
> >> Did you mean this discuss: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/12/27/122?
> > I meant about this reply instead :)
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/1/16/616
> Hi Dave,
> 
> Sorry for not repley in time, I was on holiday last week.

Hi, no problem, thanks for following up.

> 
> The platform James mentioned may exist for which have no devices and need no low memory.
> For our arm64 server platform, there are some devices and need low memory.
> 
> I got it. For the platform with no low memory, reserving crashkernel will  always fail.
> How about like this:

I think the question should leave to Catalin or James, I have no
suggestion about this:)

> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> index a8e34d97a894..4df18c7ea438 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c
> @@ -147,7 +147,7 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
>         }
>         memblock_reserve(crash_base, crash_size);
>  
> -       if (crash_base >= CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX) {
> +       if (memstart_addr < CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX && crash_base >= CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX) {
>                 const char *rename = "Crash kernel (low)";
>  
>                 if (reserve_crashkernel_low()) {
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Chen Zhou
> 
> >
> > Thanks
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > .
> >
> 
>