On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 16:01:10 -0400
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 06:33:14PM +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> > On architectures that use percpu-vm, the percpu region is not guaranteed
> > to be contiguous in physical space.
>
> Petr,
>
> Which are those arches?
All except nommu. Actually, percpu-km will be used instead even on MMU
if SMP is disabled, but since SMP is pretty standard now, I guess the
vast majority of all kernels out there is affected. ;-)
> > However, fs/proc/vmcore.c expects
> > all ELF notes to be contiguous. If the ELF note happens to occupy
> > two non-adjacent physical pages, part of the note may be read from an
> > incorrect memory location by the kdump kernel, resulting in failure to
> > initialize /proc/vmcore (if the content of the following physical page,
> > incorrectly interpreted as an ELF note specifies a large number), wrong
> > register values or other apparent random memory corruption.
> >
> > There is currently no mechanism to pass the virtual-to-physical mapping
> > of the percpu allocation to the kdump kernel. So, instead, I'm changing
> > the alignment of the ELF note buffer. Since sizeof(note_buf_t) is less
> > than PAGE_SIZE, aligning the buffer to the nearest higher power of 2
> > is enough to make sure that the buffer cannot cross a page boundary,
> > effectively ensuring that the whole buffer is contiguous in physical
> > space.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik at suse.cz>
> > ---
> > kernel/kexec.c | 3 ++-
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/kexec.c b/kernel/kexec.c
> > index 2bee072..cdab59d 100644
> > --- a/kernel/kexec.c
> > +++ b/kernel/kexec.c
> > @@ -1610,7 +1610,8 @@ void crash_save_cpu(struct pt_regs *regs, int cpu)
> > static int __init crash_notes_memory_init(void)
> > {
> > /* Allocate memory for saving cpu registers. */
> > - crash_notes = alloc_percpu(note_buf_t);
> > + crash_notes = __alloc_percpu(sizeof(note_buf_t),
> > + roundup_pow_of_two(sizeof(note_buf_t)));
>
> I think some of the changelog should show up here as comment in short
> form. I don't think it is obvious that why we are using __alloc_percpu()
> and why aligning to nearst higher power of 2 is needed here. Please also
> mention here which arches run into issues.
OK, I'll add it as a comment in the code. I'll see if I can make it
short but still understandable.
Thanks,
Petr Tesarik
> Thanks
> Vivek
>
> > if (!crash_notes) {
> > pr_warn("Kexec: Memory allocation for saving cpu register states failed\n");
> > return -ENOMEM;
> > --
> > 1.8.4.5
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > kexec mailing list
> > kexec at lists.infradead.org
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
>
> _______________________________________________
> kexec mailing list
> kexec at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
