From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@in.ibm.com>
To: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Cc: fastboot@lists.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kdump/kexec: calculate note size at compile time
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 09:14:21 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070329034421.GC9582@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070329033056.GD22141@verge.net.au>
On Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 12:30:59PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this is a(nother) minor update to this patch.
> Explanation below.
>
> --
> Horms
> H: http://www.vergenet.net/~horms/
> W: http://www.valinux.co.jp/en/
>
> [PATCH] kdump/kexec: calculate note size at compile time
>
> Currently the size of the per-cpu region reserved to save crash
> notes is set by the per-architecture value MAX_NOTE_BYTES. Which
> in turn is currently set to 1024 on all supported architectures.
>
> While testing ia64 I recently discovered that this value is
> in fact too small. The particular setup I was using actually
> needs 1172 bytes. This lead to very tedious failure mode
> where the tail of one elf note would overwrite the head of
> another if they ended up being alocated sequentially by kmalloc,
> which was often the case.
>
> It seems to me that a far better approach is to caclculate the size
> that the area needs to be. This patch does just that.
>
> If a simpler stop-gap patch for ia64 to be squeezed into 2.6.21(.X)
> is needed then this should be as easy as making MAX_NOTE_BYTES
> larger in arch/asm-ia64/kexec.h. Perhaps 2048 would be a good choice.
> However, I think that the approach in this patch is a much more robust
> idea.
>
> Update I:
>
> Changed KEXEC_NOTE_HEAD_BYTES to KEXEC_NOTE_DESC_BYTES in line
> with the name of the relevant field in struct elf_note
>
> Update II:
>
> * Use KEXEC_NOTE_NAME instead of "CORE" in kernel/kexec.c and
> arch/ia64/kernel/crash.c just to be extra sure that the data
> used to calculate the size, and the data stuffed into the reserved
> area is the same.
>
> Incidently, the ia64 code really ought to use the generic code.
> I am working on a patch for this. But it is not urgent.
>
Looks good. Another patch to make ia64 also use generic kexec code
for note generation would be nice.
Thanks
Vivek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-03-29 3:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-28 6:18 Simon Horman
2007-03-28 6:43 ` Vivek Goyal
2007-03-28 7:13 ` Horms
2007-03-28 8:08 ` Vivek Goyal
2007-03-29 3:30 ` Simon Horman
2007-03-29 3:44 ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2007-03-29 3:48 ` Simon Horman
2007-03-30 0:41 ` Andrew Morton
2007-03-30 2:34 ` Simon Horman
2007-04-02 4:48 ` Simon Horman
2007-04-02 10:10 ` Simon Horman
2007-04-03 9:37 Simon Horman
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070329034421.GC9582@in.ibm.com \
--to=vgoyal@in.ibm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fastboot@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®