Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-07-02 Thread Don Zickus (via Email Bridge)
From: Don Zickus on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_617804161

Good to see this patch always evolving. :-) The current approach is nice
because we don't carry an out of tree patch no more as @jmflinuxtx said.  I
still wish the memory reqs would come down (I know dracut/systemd make it
hard).  I remember using 32M for rhel-8 testing I think.  This would lower the
resistance to enabling this more often.

On a side positive side note.  From a CI perspective, one of the struggle with
using test frameworks with kernel testing is kernel panics.  Beaker allows us
console access, which is a side channel thing and not the norm.  Using kdump
and saving dmesg logs on panics, allows tools to easily get at stack traces
when a unexpected reboot happens.  Not a perfect solution, but something
useful when console access isn't always around (or ipmi).

Thanks for this continued effort!
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-07-01 Thread Richard W.M. Jones (via Email Bridge)
From: Richard W.M. Jones on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_616836433

libguestfs is another "small VM" use case.  Our default memory size is 1280M
(or 3584M in virt-v2v), so I guess we won't hit this.  It might be nice to
have a "crashkernel=off" parameter or similar, which we'd use to disable this
feature in our appliance.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-07-01 Thread Kairui Song (via Email Bridge)
From: Kairui Song on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_616216082

I agree with "1G-4G:192M", I can update and do a rebase again.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-07-01 Thread Baoquan He (via Email Bridge)
From: Baoquan  He on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_616208180

"1G-4G:192M" looks good to me, and the range is consistent with rhel8.5
crashkernel on the low range.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-07-01 Thread David Hildenbrand (via Email Bridge)
From: David Hildenbrand on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_616159841

Just to be clear, I'm not strongly against this. I just can see it turn some
corner case setups broken without any clear benefit if we consider the system
requirements a recommendation that customers should stick to until they really
know what they are doing (customers will always complain, and if it's that
their corner case setup no longer boots due to the changed crashkernel
allocation policy).
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-07-01 Thread Dave Young (via Email Bridge)
From: Dave Young on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_616156922

Yes, if we regard the 1.5G minimum requirement then it would be good enough as
you said.
@baoquan_he @kasong , what do you think?
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-07-01 Thread David Hildenbrand (via Email Bridge)
From: David Hildenbrand on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_616152308

Exactly, and as I said, once we're dealing with such small VMs that are below
the recommended memory size, why do we even care?

1.5 GiB will work fine, with or without that patch. For 1 GiB VMs crashkernel
will not be allocated, which is what we usually want. For example, before this
change a 786MiB VM might work just fine. With that change, we might run out of
memory during boot because of the crashkernel (consuming 192MiB) still
succeeding to get allocated.

Customers that complain that the crashkernel won't get allocated for a 1GiB VM
can be pointed at the recommended system size IMHO.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-07-01 Thread Dave Young (via Email Bridge)
From: Dave Young on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_616135228

Hi David,

The details of the round up is like below:
For 1G-4G:xM,  in kernel code we check if system_ram_size < 1G then kernel
does not reserve kdump memory otherwise xM mem is reserved.   But here the
system_ram_size is not acurate, say a system with 1G memory installed,  the
system_ram_size could be 900M in kernel point of view.  That will cause no
kdump memory reserved.  It is somehow reasonable but hard to explain to
customer because people regard 1G as the system memory size.  And it will be
hard for QE to test as well.  So we had a RHEL only patch which round up
system mem size by 128M.  This patch will be dropped as well.

Hope this can explain the question.
Thanks!
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-07-01 Thread David Hildenbrand (via Email Bridge)
From: David Hildenbrand on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_616124920

With kata-containers we run VMs as small as 256 MiB (or sometimes even
smaller). However, in these setups, we run a stripped-down OS, so we can
expect to kdump never to be installed/active (and IIUC, that implies that we
never do a crashkernel reservation). At least that's what I assume.

Note that [RHEL documents "Recommended minimum RAM"
](https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_linux/8/htm
l/performing_a_standard_rhel_installation/system-requirements-
reference_installing-rhel), with a note that "It is possible to complete the
installation with less memory than the recommended minimum requirements. The
exact requirements depend on your environment and installation path.". So it
might work with more or less. I wouldn't be surprised if people are running
1GiB VMs with RHEL8; the question is, if these setups default-install kdump (I
assume so?), and if we care for new versions of RHEL.

On small VMs, we end up "wasting" a significant amount of memory on kdump
reservations, which makes me believe that kdump isn't actually a good fit for
small VMs at all, especially with newer RHEL kernels. So if we assume that
people with less than 1.5G don't need kdump, why care at all about "we have
another RHEL only patch to round up the memblock collected system ram size by
128M"?

I don't immediately see why the switch from 1G-4G to 0G-4G is actually helpful
and I'd just leave it like that and have kdump disabled for machines that have
a memblock size < 1 GiB. Can you clarify what I am missing?
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-06-30 Thread Dave Young (via Email Bridge)
From: Dave Young on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_615911272

Hi Kairui, it worth to say more about the reason of the update from 1G-4G to
0G-4G:

* originally we have another RHEL only patch to round up the memblock
collected system ram size by 128M because the memblock total size usually less
than actual dimm size.  Moving to 0-4G we can safely work without that patch.
* the RHEL installtion minimum mem requirement is 1.5G for RHEL8, so we expect
this will not have extra adding impact for small memory systems.

But anyway if virt people can confirm about the minimum memory requirement is
>=1G it would be great.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-06-29 Thread Kairui Song (via Email Bridge)
From: Kairui Song on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_614230003

Thanks for all the useful info!

I just updated the crashkernel value for x86/s390 to
`0G-4G:192M,4G-64G:256M,64G-:512M`, and changed the file name to
`crashkernel.default`, as suggested by @baoquan_he and @ruyang. Also rebased
to latest `os-build` branch.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-06-22 Thread Justin M. Forbes (via Email Bridge)
From: Justin M. Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_608230087

> Good suggestion, I'll update the crashkernel default values. I tried to
figure out what is causing the growth of
kernel-5.13.0-0.rc4.20210603git324c92e5e0ee.34, and found a lot of new things
enabled in config, kgdb, kfence, and many other debug configs will all cause
.bss to grow (switch back to old .config from f33, using the same kernel
version and code base the .bss will be \~5M again). I'm not sure if we will
turn off some of the debug options in the future but kernel is growing after
all.

Any rawhide kernel with a git snapshot version after the rcX is built as a
debug kernel only.  This is a rawhide specific thing, and will nt translate to
stable releases.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-06-22 Thread Kairui Song (via Email Bridge)
From: Kairui Song on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_607699104

Good suggestion, I'll update the crashkernel default values. I tried to figure
out what is causing the growth of
kernel-5.13.0-0.rc4.20210603git324c92e5e0ee.34, and found a lot of new things
enabled in config, kgdb, kfence, and many other debug configs will all cause
.bss to grow (switch back to old .config from f33, using the same kernel
version and code base the .bss will be ~5M again). I'm not sure if we will
turn off some of the debug options in the future but kernel is growing after
all.

So for x86 and s390, we can change the crashkernel value to
0G-4G:192M,4G-64G:256M,64G-:512M (previously
1G-4G:160M,4G-64G:192M,64G-1T:256M,1T-:512M).

According to https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_enterprise_
linux/8/html/performing_a_standard_rhel_installation/system-requirements-
reference_installing-rhel#check-disk-and-memory-requirements_system-
requirements-reference, since we already requiring at least 1.5 GiB memory for
RHEL, but I'm not sure how things work for VM deployments, will this cause
more memory pressure for VMs?
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-06-17 Thread Baoquan He (via Email Bridge)
From: Baoquan  He on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_603721731

Thanks for telling. Kairui told he would update to change the crashkernel
value, will add comment with "Acked-by".
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-06-17 Thread Patrick Talbert (via Email Bridge)
From: Patrick Talbert on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_603643859

The kernel-ark project has a limited number of members on GL and only members
can see/use the Approve button. Please simply leave a comment with an 'Acked-
by: NAME ' line (or Nacked, etc).

Thank you,

Patrick
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-06-17 Thread Baoquan He (via Email Bridge)
From: Baoquan  He on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_603596202

And about the crashkernel value, we may need increase the lowest value from
160M to a larger value, e.g 192M. When checked CKI failure of kdump test case,
I found the kernel itself has been enlarged a little to 40M+.

And worse, I found since kernel-5.13.0-0.rc4.20210603git324c92e5e0ee.34, bss
of kernel increased from 5M to 22M, this surely need be figured out what
happened. RHEL9 kernel seems to be larger than rhel8, increasing the
crashkernel value a little bit could be safer.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-06-16 Thread Baoquan He (via Email Bridge)
From: Baoquan  He on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_603518910

This series of change looks good to me. While I can't find the approval button
to add Acked-by. Is it caused by the failued pipeline?

"Detached merge request pipeline #318739078 failed for 93508176 6 days ago"
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-06-11 Thread Patrick Talbert (via Email Bridge)
From: Patrick Talbert on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_599283160

Acked-by: Patrick Talbert 
(via approve button)
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure


Re: [OS-BUILD PATCH 0/0] [redhat] Generate a crashkernel.conf for each kernel build

2021-06-10 Thread Justin M. Forbes (via Email Bridge)
From: Justin M. Forbes on gitlab.com
https://gitlab.com/cki-project/kernel-ark/-/merge_requests/1171#note_598575491

I am in favor of this, as it changes things back closer to upstream.
___
kernel mailing list -- kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure