linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 4/8] crash: add generic infrastructure for crash hotplug support

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: <821b3c62-eedf-c1a3-4aba-671c90d83288@oracle.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Apr 2022 08:54:22 -0500
From:   Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@...cle.com>
To:     Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        kexec@...ts.infradead.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
        dyoung@...hat.com, vgoyal@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        hpa@...or.com, nramas@...ux.microsoft.com, thomas.lendacky@....com,
        robh@...nel.org, efault@....de, rppt@...nel.org, david@...hat.com,
        konrad.wilk@...cle.com, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/8] crash: add generic infrastructure for crash
 hotplug support



On 4/11/22 04:20, Baoquan He wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> 
> On 04/01/22 at 02:30pm, Eric DeVolder wrote:
> ... ...
> 
>> +static void crash_hotplug_handler(unsigned int hp_action,
>> +	unsigned long a, unsigned long b)
> 
> I am still struggling to consider if these unused parameters should be
> kept or removed. Do you foresee or feel on which ARCH they could be used?
> 
> Considering our elfcorehdr updating method, once memory or cpu changed,
> we will update elfcorehdr and cpu notes to reflect all existing memory
> regions and cpu in the current system. We could end up with having them
> but never being used. Then we may finally need to clean them up.
> 
> If you have investigated and foresee or feel they could be used on a
> certain architecture, we can keep them for the time being.

So 'hp_action' and 'a' are used within the existing patch series.
In crash_core.c, there is this bit of code:

+       kexec_crash_image->offlinecpu =
+           (hp_action == KEXEC_CRASH_HP_REMOVE_CPU) ?
+               (unsigned int)a : ~0U;

which is referencing both 'hp_action' and using 'a' from the cpu notifier handler.
I looked into removing 'a' and setting offlinecpu directly, but I thought
it better that offlinecpu be set within the safety of the kexec_mutex.
Also, Sourabh Jain's work with PowerPC utilizing this framework directly
references hp_action in the arch-specific handler.

The cpu and memory notifier handlers set hp_action accordingly. For cpu handler,
the 'a' is set with the impacted cpu. For memory handler, 'a' and 'b' form the
impacted memory range. I agree it looks like the memory range is currently
not useful.

Let me know what you think.
eric

> 
>> +{
>> +	/* Obtain lock while changing crash information */
>> +	if (!mutex_trylock(&kexec_mutex))
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	/* Check kdump is loaded */
>> +	if (kexec_crash_image) {
>> +		pr_debug("crash hp: hp_action %u, a %lu, b %lu", hp_action,
>> +			a, b);
>> +
>> +		/* Needed in order for the segments to be updated */
>> +		arch_kexec_unprotect_crashkres();
>> +
>> +		/* Flag to differentiate between normal load and hotplug */
>> +		kexec_crash_image->hotplug_event = true;
>> +
>> +		/* Now invoke arch-specific update handler */
>> +		arch_crash_hotplug_handler(kexec_crash_image, hp_action, a, b);
>> +
>> +		/* No longer handling a hotplug event */
>> +		kexec_crash_image->hotplug_event = false;
>> +
>> +		/* Change back to read-only */
>> +		arch_kexec_protect_crashkres();
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	/* Release lock now that update complete */
>> +	mutex_unlock(&kexec_mutex);
>> +}
>> +
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG)
>> +static int crash_memhp_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb,
>> +	unsigned long val, void *v)
>> +{
>> +	struct memory_notify *mhp = v;
>> +	unsigned long start, end;
>> +
>> +	start = mhp->start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT;
>> +	end = ((mhp->start_pfn + mhp->nr_pages) << PAGE_SHIFT) - 1;
>> +
>> +	switch (val) {
>> +	case MEM_ONLINE:
>> +		crash_hotplug_handler(KEXEC_CRASH_HP_ADD_MEMORY,
>> +			start, end-start);
>> +		break;
>> +
>> +	case MEM_OFFLINE:
>> +		crash_hotplug_handler(KEXEC_CRASH_HP_REMOVE_MEMORY,
>> +			start, end-start);
>> +		break;
>> +	}
>> +	return NOTIFY_OK;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static struct notifier_block crash_memhp_nb = {
>> +	.notifier_call = crash_memhp_notifier,
>> +	.priority = 0
>> +};
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU)
>> +static int crash_cpuhp_online(unsigned int cpu)
>> +{
>> +	crash_hotplug_handler(KEXEC_CRASH_HP_ADD_CPU, cpu, 0);
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int crash_cpuhp_offline(unsigned int cpu)
>> +{
>> +	crash_hotplug_handler(KEXEC_CRASH_HP_REMOVE_CPU, cpu, 0);
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +static int __init crash_hotplug_init(void)
>> +{
>> +	int result = 0;
>> +
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG)
>> +	register_memory_notifier(&crash_memhp_nb);
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +#if defined(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU)
>> +	result = cpuhp_setup_state_nocalls(CPUHP_AP_ONLINE_DYN,
>> +				"crash/cpuhp",
>> +				crash_cpuhp_online, crash_cpuhp_offline);
>> +#endif
>> +
>> +	return result;
>> +}
>> +
>> +subsys_initcall(crash_hotplug_init);
>> +#endif /* CONFIG_CRASH_HOTPLUG */
>> -- 
>> 2.27.0
>>
>