On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 02:04:22PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 06:37:19PM +0300, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote: > > "second kernel" is nomenclature kexec folks are using, but okay. > > And the "third kernel" is the one which got kexec-ed the second time? > > You can make it: "The second, kexec-ed kernel" and then it is perfectly > clear. Okay. > > One possible reason for the failure is if kdump raced with memory > > conversion. In this case shared bit in page table got set (or not cleared > > form shared->private conversion), but the page is actually private. So > > this failure is not going to affect the kexec'ed kernel. > > Lemme make sure I understand what you're saying here: > > 1. This is a fatal failure and we should panic > > However, > > 2. the kexec-ed kernel is using a different page table so there won't be > a mismatch between shared/private marking of the page so it doesn't > matter > > Close? Yes. One other point is even if the failure is real and we cannot touch the page as private, kdump kernel will boot fine as it uses pre-reserved memory. What happens next depends on what dumping process does. We have reasonable chance to produce useful dump on crash. -- Kiryl Shutsemau / Kirill A. Shutemov _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
