linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next v3 1/2] riscv: kdump: Implement crashkernel=X,[high,low]

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:   Mon, 10 Apr 2023 17:20:29 +0800
From:   "chenjiahao (C)" <chenjiahao16@...wei.com>
To:     Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
CC:     <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, <palmer@...belt.com>,
        <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>, <guoren@...nel.org>,
        <heiko@...ech.de>, <bjorn@...osinc.com>, <alex@...ti.fr>,
        <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, <atishp@...osinc.com>,
        <bhe@...hat.com>, <thunder.leizhen@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next v3 1/2] riscv: kdump: Implement
 crashkernel=X,[high,low]


On 2023/4/7 20:03, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 07, 2023 at 06:02:05AM +0800, Chen Jiahao wrote:
>> On riscv, the current crash kernel allocation logic is trying to
>> allocate within 32bit addressible memory region by default, if
>> failed, try to allocate without 4G restriction.
>>
>> In need of saving DMA zone memory while allocating a relatively large
>> crash kernel region, allocating the reserved memory top down in
>> high memory, without overlapping the DMA zone, is a mature solution.
>> Here introduce the parameter option crashkernel=X,[high,low].
>>
>> One can reserve the crash kernel from high memory above DMA zone range
>> by explicitly passing "crashkernel=X,high"; or reserve a memory range
>> below 4G with "crashkernel=X,low".
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen Jiahao <chenjiahao16@...wei.com>
> ...
>
>> @@ -1180,14 +1206,37 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void)
>>   		return;
>>   	}
>>   
>> -	ret = parse_crashkernel(boot_command_line, memblock_phys_mem_size(),
>> +	ret = parse_crashkernel(cmdline, memblock_phys_mem_size(),
>>   				&crash_size, &crash_base);
>> -	if (ret || !crash_size)
>> +	if (ret == -ENOENT) {
>> +		/*
>> +		 * crashkernel=X,[high,low] can be specified or not, but
>> +		 * invalid value is not allowed.
> nit: Perhaps something like this would be easier to correlate with the
>       code that follows:
>
> 		/* Fallback to crashkernel=X,[high,low] */
>
Agreed, this would be more concise and accurate.
>> +		 */
>> +		ret = parse_crashkernel_high(cmdline, 0, &crash_size, &crash_base);
>> +		if (ret || !crash_size)
>> +			return;
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * crashkernel=Y,low is valid only when crashkernel=X,high
>> +		 * is passed and high memory is reserved successful.
> nit: s/successful/successfully/

I will fix above nits and resend another version later, thanks.


>> +		 */
>> +		ret = parse_crashkernel_low(cmdline, 0, &crash_low_size, &crash_base);
>> +		if (ret == -ENOENT)
>> +			crash_low_size = DEFAULT_CRASH_KERNEL_LOW_SIZE;
>> +		else if (ret)
>> +			return;
>> +
>> +		search_start = search_low_max;
>> +	} else if (ret || !crash_size) {
>> +		/* Invalid argument value specified */
>>   		return;
>> +	}
> ...