On 02/23/18 at 11:01am, Philipp Rudo wrote:
> Hi Dave
> 
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2018 16:34:05 +0800
> Dave Young <dyo...@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 02/14/18 at 10:54am, Philipp Rudo wrote:
> > > Hi Dave,
> > > 
> > > I just browsed AKASHI's patches (v7). The way I see it the common code 
> > > changes
> > > are on different areas of kexec_file and shouldn't get in conflict. Only 
> > > in the
> > > arch code (s390 and arm64) some function calls might need an update. But 
> > > I have
> > > to take a closer look on the patches first.  
> > 
> > I'm tring both in local branch with both series (V8 from AKASHI and this 
> > series),
> > but there are indeed some conflicts, may because AKASHI factored out some 
> > arch
> > code from ppc/x86 to common code.
> 
> I feared this would happen.  I didn't have time to look at AKASHI's v8
> yesterday but hope to find some today. How do you think i should handle
> conflicts with his patches? I don't think it is wise to include the changes
> into my patches as that would make AKASHI's patches a prereq for mine. Is 
> adding
> one (multiple?) fixup patches on top of my series ok for you?

Arch code need arch maintainer to review, maybe either of you can send
the common part first before the arch code, eg. AKASHI can split the common
 cleanup patches and post them as a separate series, after these prep
series are reviewed then other patches can be refreshed based on it.

Seems in AKASHI's series, only patch 2, 3 ,4 ,5 is needed if split out
as a common change series.

What do you think? 
> 
> Thanks
> Philipp
> 
> > > 
> > > @AKASHI: Welcome to the list. While browsing I couldn't find any
> > > arch_apply_relocation function for arm64. These require the biggest 
> > > changes in
> > > my patch set. Did I just miss it or does arm64 work differently?
> > > 
> > > @Dave: Happy holiday  
> > 
> > Thank you!
> > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > Philipp
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 14 Feb 2018 15:35:43 +0800
> > > Dave Young <dyo...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > Hi Philipp,
> > > > 
> > > > I added AKASHI in cc, he posted arm64 kexec_file series previously.
> > > > I would like to read both series especially the general part, but
> > > > maybe at the end of this month because of a holiday..
> > > > 
> > > > From the patch log the cleanup looks nice, but still need read the
> > > > details.
> > > > 
> > > > On 02/12/18 at 11:07am, Philipp Rudo wrote:  
> > > > > Hi everybody
> > > > > 
> > > > > resending the series as there was no reaction, yet. Furthermore i was 
> > > > > told
> > > > > that Andrew and the x86 list should also be CCed, so welcome.
> > > > > 
> > > > > No changes made to the patches since first time i sent them. The 
> > > > > patches
> > > > > apply to the current master (v4.16-rc1).
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Philipp
> > > > > 
> > > > > ---
> > > > > 
> > > > > this series adds the kexec_file_load system call to s390. Before the 
> > > > > system
> > > > > call is added there are some preparations/clean ups to common
> > > > > kexec_file_load. In detail this series contains:
> > > > > 
> > > > > Patch #1&2: Minor cleanups/fixes.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Patch #3-9: Clean up the purgatory load/relocation code. Especially 
> > > > > remove
> > > > > the mis-use of the purgatory_info->sechdrs->sh_offset field, currently
> > > > > holding a pointer into either kexec_purgatory (ro) or purgatory_buf 
> > > > > (rw)
> > > > > depending on the section. With these patches the section address will 
> > > > > be
> > > > > calculated verbosely and sh_offset will contain the offset of the 
> > > > > section
> > > > > in the stripped purgatory binary (purgatory_buf).
> > > > > 
> > > > > Patch #10: Allows architectures to set the purgaory load address. This
> > > > > patch is important for s390 as the kernel and purgatory have to be 
> > > > > loaded
> > > > > to fixed addresses. In current code this is impossible as the 
> > > > > purgatory
> > > > > load is opaque to the architecture.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Patch #11: Moves x86 purgatories sha implementation to common lib/
> > > > > directory.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Patches #12-17 finally adds the kexec_file_load system call to s390.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Please note that I had to touch arch code for x86 and power a little. 
> > > > > In
> > > > > theory this should not change the behavior but I don't have a way to 
> > > > > test
> > > > > it. Cross-compiling with defconfig(*) works fine for both.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Philipp
> > > > > 
> > > > > (*) On x86 with the orc unwinder turned off. objtool SEGFAULTs on 
> > > > > s390...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Philipp Rudo (17):
> > > > >   kexec_file: Silence compile warnings
> > > > >   kexec_file: Remove checks in kexec_purgatory_load
> > > > >   kexec_file: Make purgatory_info->ehdr const
> > > > >   kexec_file: Search symbols in read-only kexec_purgatory
> > > > >   kexec_file: Use read-only sections in arch_kexec_apply_relocations*
> > > > >   kexec_file: Split up __kexec_load_puragory
> > > > >   kexec_file: Simplify kexec_purgatory_setup_sechdrs 1
> > > > >   kexec_file: Simplify kexec_purgatory_setup_sechdrs 2
> > > > >   kexec_file: Remove mis-use of sh_offset field
> > > > >   kexec_file: Allow archs to set purgatory load address
> > > > >   kexec_file: Move purgatories sha256 to common code
> > > > >   s390/kexec_file: Prepare setup.h for kexec_file_load
> > > > >   s390/kexec_file: Add purgatory
> > > > >   s390/kexec_file: Add kexec_file_load system call
> > > > >   s390/kexec_file: Add image loader
> > > > >   s390/kexec_file: Add crash support to image loader
> > > > >   s390/kexec_file: Add ELF loader
> > > > > 
> > > > >  arch/powerpc/kernel/kexec_elf_64.c             |   9 +-
> > > > >  arch/s390/Kbuild                               |   1 +
> > > > >  arch/s390/Kconfig                              |   4 +
> > > > >  arch/s390/include/asm/kexec.h                  |  23 ++
> > > > >  arch/s390/include/asm/purgatory.h              |  17 ++
> > > > >  arch/s390/include/asm/setup.h                  |  40 ++-
> > > > >  arch/s390/kernel/Makefile                      |   1 +
> > > > >  arch/s390/kernel/asm-offsets.c                 |   5 +
> > > > >  arch/s390/kernel/compat_wrapper.c              |   1 +
> > > > >  arch/s390/kernel/kexec_elf.c                   | 149 ++++++++++
> > > > >  arch/s390/kernel/kexec_image.c                 |  78 +++++
> > > > >  arch/s390/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c          | 291 
> > > > > +++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >  arch/s390/kernel/syscalls/syscall.tbl          |   1 +
> > > > >  arch/s390/purgatory/Makefile                   |  37 +++
> > > > >  arch/s390/purgatory/head.S                     | 279 
> > > > > ++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >  arch/s390/purgatory/purgatory.c                |  42 +++
> > > > >  arch/x86/kernel/kexec-bzimage64.c              |   8 +-
> > > > >  arch/x86/kernel/machine_kexec_64.c             |  66 ++---
> > > > >  arch/x86/purgatory/Makefile                    |   3 +
> > > > >  arch/x86/purgatory/purgatory.c                 |   2 +-
> > > > >  include/linux/kexec.h                          |  38 +--
> > > > >  {arch/x86/purgatory => include/linux}/sha256.h |  10 +-
> > > > >  kernel/kexec_file.c                            | 375 
> > > > > ++++++++++++-------------
> > > > >  {arch/x86/purgatory => lib}/sha256.c           |   4 +-
> > > > >  24 files changed, 1200 insertions(+), 284 deletions(-)
> > > > >  create mode 100644 arch/s390/include/asm/purgatory.h
> > > > >  create mode 100644 arch/s390/kernel/kexec_elf.c
> > > > >  create mode 100644 arch/s390/kernel/kexec_image.c
> > > > >  create mode 100644 arch/s390/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c
> > > > >  create mode 100644 arch/s390/purgatory/Makefile
> > > > >  create mode 100644 arch/s390/purgatory/head.S
> > > > >  create mode 100644 arch/s390/purgatory/purgatory.c
> > > > >  rename {arch/x86/purgatory => include/linux}/sha256.h (63%)
> > > > >  rename {arch/x86/purgatory => lib}/sha256.c (99%)
> > > > > 
> > > > > -- 
> > > > > 2.13.5
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > kexec mailing list
> > > > > kexec@lists.infradead.org
> > > > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec    
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Dave
> > > >   
> > >   
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > kexec mailing list
> > kexec@lists.infradead.org
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
> > 
> 

_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

Reply via email to