linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v12 7/7] x86/crash: Add x86 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]

Date:   Fri, 30 Sep 2022 18:50:55 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@...cle.com>,
        Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, david@...hat.com
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        kexec@...ts.infradead.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
        dyoung@...hat.com, bhe@...hat.com, vgoyal@...hat.com,
        tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        hpa@...or.com, nramas@...ux.microsoft.com, thomas.lendacky@....com,
        robh@...nel.org, efault@....de, rppt@...nel.org,
        sourabhjain@...ux.ibm.com, linux-mm@...ck.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 7/7] x86/crash: Add x86 crash hotplug support

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 10:36:49AM -0500, Eric DeVolder wrote:
> > Your help text talks about System RAM entries in /proc/iomem which means
> > that those entries are present somewhere in the kernel and you can read
> > them out and do the proper calculations dynamically instead of doing the
> > static CONFIG_NR_CPUS_DEFAULT + CONFIG_CRASH_MAX_MEMORY_RANGES thing.
> 
> The intent is to compute the max size buffer needed to contain a maximum
> populated elfcorehdr, which is primarily based on the number of CPUs and
> memory regions. Thus far I (and others involved) have not found a kernel
> method to determine the maximum number of memory regions possible (if you
> are aware of one, please let me know!). Thus CONFIG_CRASH_MAX_MEMORY_RANGES
> was born (rather borrowed from kexec-tools).

Let's ask some mm folks.

mm folks, is there a way to enumerate all the memory regions a machine
has?

It looks to me like register_memory_resource() in mm/memory_hotplug.c
does register the resource so there should be a way to count that list
of resources or at least maintain a count somewhere so that kexec/crash
code can know how big its elfcodehdr buffer should be instead of doing a
clumsy Kconfig item where people would need to guess...

Hmm.

> > +#ifdef CONFIG_CRASH_MAX_MEMORY_RANGES
> So I think the use of CONFIG_CRASH_MAX_MEMORY_RANGES is not correct; it
> still needs to be based on the cpu or memory hotplug options.

You're kidding, right?

+config CRASH_MAX_MEMORY_RANGES
+	depends on CRASH_DUMP && KEXEC_FILE && (HOTPLUG_CPU || MEMORY_HOTPLUG)
	^^^^^^^^^^				^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> > @@ -622,6 +622,15 @@ static int __init crash_save_vmcoreinfo_init(void)
> >   subsys_initcall(crash_save_vmcoreinfo_init);
> >   #if defined(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU) || defined(CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG)
> > +
> > +void __weak *arch_map_crash_pages(unsigned long paddr, unsigned long size)
> > +{
> > +	return NULL;
> > +}
> > +
> > +void __weak arch_unmap_crash_pages(void **ptr) { }
> > +void __weak arch_crash_handle_hotplug_event(struct kimage *image, unsigned int hp_action) { }
> > +
> I was asked by Baoquan He to eliminate the use of __weak

Because?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette