| Message ID | 20210130071025.65258-8-chenzhou10@huawei.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | support reserving crashkernel above 4G on arm64 kdump | expand |
Hi Chen, On Sat, 2021-01-30 at 15:10 +0800, Chen Zhou wrote: > Introduce macro CRASH_ALIGN for alignment, macro CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX > for upper bound of low crash memory, macro CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX for > upper bound of high crash memory, use macroes instead. > > Besides, keep consistent with x86, use CRASH_ALIGN as the lower bound > of crash kernel reservation. > > Signed-off-by: Chen Zhou <chenzhou10@huawei.com> > Tested-by: John Donnelly <John.p.donnelly@oracle.com> > --- > arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h | 6 ++++++ > arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 6 +++--- > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h > index d24b527e8c00..3f6ecae0bc68 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h > @@ -25,6 +25,12 @@ > > > #define KEXEC_ARCH KEXEC_ARCH_AARCH64 > > > +/* 2M alignment for crash kernel regions */ > +#define CRASH_ALIGN SZ_2M > + > +#define CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX arm64_dma_phys_limit I wonder if you could use 'ARCH_LOW_ADDRESS_LIMIT', instead of creating a new define. > +#define CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE > + > #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > > > /** > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c > index 709d98fea90c..912f64f505f7 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c > @@ -84,8 +84,8 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void) > > > if (crash_base == 0) { > /* Current arm64 boot protocol requires 2MB alignment */ > - crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(0, arm64_dma_phys_limit, > - crash_size, SZ_2M); > + crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(CRASH_ALIGN, CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX, > + crash_size, CRASH_ALIGN); Actually we could get rid of CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX altogether if we used memblock_alloc_low() here (modulo the slight refactoring needed to accommodate it). Regards, Nicolas
On Thu, 2021-02-04 at 17:20 +0100, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote: > Hi Chen, > > On Sat, 2021-01-30 at 15:10 +0800, Chen Zhou wrote: > > Introduce macro CRASH_ALIGN for alignment, macro CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX > > for upper bound of low crash memory, macro CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX for > > upper bound of high crash memory, use macroes instead. > > > > Besides, keep consistent with x86, use CRASH_ALIGN as the lower bound > > of crash kernel reservation. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chen Zhou <chenzhou10@huawei.com> > > Tested-by: John Donnelly <John.p.donnelly@oracle.com> > > --- > > arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h | 6 ++++++ > > arch/arm64/mm/init.c | 6 +++--- > > 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h > > index d24b527e8c00..3f6ecae0bc68 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h > > @@ -25,6 +25,12 @@ > > > > > > #define KEXEC_ARCH KEXEC_ARCH_AARCH64 > > > > > > +/* 2M alignment for crash kernel regions */ > > +#define CRASH_ALIGN SZ_2M > > + > > +#define CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX arm64_dma_phys_limit > > I wonder if you could use 'ARCH_LOW_ADDRESS_LIMIT', instead of creating a new > define. > > > +#define CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE > > + > > #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ > > > > > > /** > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c > > index 709d98fea90c..912f64f505f7 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c > > @@ -84,8 +84,8 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void) > > > > > > if (crash_base == 0) { > > /* Current arm64 boot protocol requires 2MB alignment */ > > - crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(0, arm64_dma_phys_limit, > > - crash_size, SZ_2M); > > + crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(CRASH_ALIGN, CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX, > > + crash_size, CRASH_ALIGN); > > Actually we could get rid of CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX altogether if we used > memblock_alloc_low() here (modulo the slight refactoring needed to accommodate > it). Forget about these coments, I now see that you're deleting this whole function on the next patch and defaulting to a generic implementation. Sorry for the noise. Regards, Nicolas
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h index d24b527e8c00..3f6ecae0bc68 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kexec.h @@ -25,6 +25,12 @@ #define KEXEC_ARCH KEXEC_ARCH_AARCH64 +/* 2M alignment for crash kernel regions */ +#define CRASH_ALIGN SZ_2M + +#define CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX arm64_dma_phys_limit +#define CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX MEMBLOCK_ALLOC_ACCESSIBLE + #ifndef __ASSEMBLY__ /** diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c index 709d98fea90c..912f64f505f7 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/mm/init.c +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/init.c @@ -84,8 +84,8 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void) if (crash_base == 0) { /* Current arm64 boot protocol requires 2MB alignment */ - crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(0, arm64_dma_phys_limit, - crash_size, SZ_2M); + crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(CRASH_ALIGN, CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX, + crash_size, CRASH_ALIGN); if (crash_base == 0) { pr_warn("cannot allocate crashkernel (size:0x%llx)\n", crash_size); @@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void) return; } - if (!IS_ALIGNED(crash_base, SZ_2M)) { + if (!IS_ALIGNED(crash_base, CRASH_ALIGN)) { pr_warn("cannot reserve crashkernel: base address is not 2MB aligned\n"); return; }