On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 4:28 AM Saeed Mirzamohammadi
<saeed.mirzamohammadi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> And I think crashkernel=auto could be used as an indicator that user
> want the kernel to control the crashkernel size, so some further work
> could be done to adjust the crashkernel more accordingly. eg. when
> memory encryption is enabled, increase the crashkernel value for the
> auto estimation, as it's known to consume more crashkernel memory.
>
> Thanks for the suggestion! I tried to keep it simple and leave it to the user to change Kconfig in case a different range is needed. Based on experience, these ranges work well for most of the regular cases.
Yes, I think the current implementation is a very good start.
There are some use cases, where kernel is expected to reserve more memory, like:
- when memory encryption is enabled, an extra swiotlb size of memory
should be reserved
- on pcc, fadump will expect more memory to be reserved
I believe there are a lot more cases like these.
I tried to come up with some patches to let the kernel reserve more
memory automatically, when such conditions are detected, but changing
the crashkernel= specified value is really weird.
But if we have a crashkernel=auto, then kernel automatically reserve
more memory will make sense.
> But why not make it arch-independent? This crashkernel=auto idea
> should simply work with every arch.
>
>
> Thanks! I’ll be making it arch-independent in the v2 patch.
>
>
> #include <asm/page.h>
> #include <asm/sections.h>
> @@ -41,6 +42,15 @@ static int __init parse_crashkernel_mem(char *cmdline,
> unsigned long long *crash_base)
> {
> char *cur = cmdline, *tmp;
> + unsigned long long total_mem = system_ram;
> +
> + /*
> + * Firmware sometimes reserves some memory regions for it's own use.
> + * so we get less than actual system memory size.
> + * Workaround this by round up the total size to 128M which is
> + * enough for most test cases.
> + */
> + total_mem = roundup(total_mem, SZ_128M);
>
>
> I think this rounding may be better moved to the arch specified part
> where parse_crashkernel is called?
>
>
> Thanks for the suggestion. Could you please elaborate why do we need to do that?
Every arch gets their total memory value using different methods,
(just check every parse_crashkernel call, and the system_ram param is
filled in many different ways), so I'm really not sure if this
rounding is always suitable.
>
> Thanks,
> Saeed
>
>
--
Best Regards,
Kairui Song
