[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210224141939.GA28965@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 14:19:42 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Chen Zhou <chenzhou10@...wei.com>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, rppt@...nel.org,
dyoung@...hat.com, bhe@...hat.com, will@...nel.org,
nsaenzjulienne@...e.de, corbet@....net, John.P.donnelly@...cle.com,
bhsharma@...hat.com, prabhakar.pkin@...il.com, horms@...ge.net.au,
robh+dt@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, james.morse@....com,
xiexiuqi@...wei.com, guohanjun@...wei.com, huawei.libin@...wei.com,
wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 01/11] x86: kdump: replace the hard-coded alignment
with macro CRASH_ALIGN
On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 03:10:15PM +0800, Chen Zhou wrote:
> Move CRASH_ALIGN to header asm/kexec.h for later use. Besides, the
> alignment of crash kernel regions in x86 is 16M(CRASH_ALIGN), but
> function reserve_crashkernel() also used 1M alignment. So just
> replace hard-coded alignment 1M with macro CRASH_ALIGN.
[...]
> @@ -510,7 +507,7 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
> } else {
> unsigned long long start;
>
> - start = memblock_phys_alloc_range(crash_size, SZ_1M, crash_base,
> + start = memblock_phys_alloc_range(crash_size, CRASH_ALIGN, crash_base,
> crash_base + crash_size);
> if (start != crash_base) {
> pr_info("crashkernel reservation failed - memory is in use.\n");
There is a small functional change here for x86. Prior to this patch,
crash_base passed by the user on the command line is allowed to be 1MB
aligned. With this patch, such reservation will fail.
Is the current behaviour a bug in the current x86 code or it does allow
1MB-aligned reservations?
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists