The hardware will do some verification, but not completely. If people think
the OS should also do this, then it should be another patchset, I think.
Thanks
Zhenhua
> 在 2015年4月3日，17:21，Dave Young <dyo...@redhat.com> 写道：
>
>> On 04/03/15 at 05:01pm, Li, ZhenHua wrote:
>> Hi Dave,
>>
>> There may be some possibilities that the old iommu data is corrupted by
>> some other modules. Currently we do not have a better solution for the
>> dmar faults.
>>
>> But I think when this happens, we need to fix the module that corrupted
>> the old iommu data. I once met a similar problem in normal kernel, the
>> queue used by the qi_* functions was written again by another module.
>> The fix was in that module, not in iommu module.
>
> It is too late, there will be no chance to save vmcore then.
>
> Also if it is possible to continue corrupt other area of oldmem because
> of using old iommu tables then it will cause more problems.
>
> So I think the tables at least need some verifycation before being used.
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Zhenhua
>>
>> On 04/03/2015 04:40 PM, Dave Young wrote:
>>>> To fix this problem, we modifies the behaviors of the intel vt-d in the
>>>> crashdump kernel:
>>>>
>>>> For DMA Remapping:
>>>> 1. To accept the vt-d hardware in an active state,
>>>> 2. Do not disable and re-enable the translation, keep it enabled.
>>>> 3. Use the old root entry table, do not rewrite the RTA register.
>>>> 4. Malloc and use new context entry table, copy data from the old ones that
>>>> used by the old kernel.
>>>
>>> Have not read all the patches, but I have a question, not sure this has been
>>> answered before. Old memory is not reliable, what if the old memory get
>>> corrupted
>>> before panic? Is it safe to continue using it in 2nd kernel, I worry that
>>> it will
>>> cause problems.
>>>
>>> Hope I'm wrong though.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Dave
>>
N�Р骒r��y����b�X�肚�v�^�)藓{.n�+�伐�{��赙zXФ�≤�}��财�z�&j:+v�����赙zZ+��+zf＂�h���~����i���z� �wア�?�ㄨ��&�)撷f��^j谦y�m��@A�a囤�
0鹅h���i
