Re: [PATCH] x86, kdump: Fix efi=noruntime NULL pointer dereference

[Mike Galbraith]

On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 11:57 +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> 
> Mike, since we are going this way, I'm working on a kexec code cleanup,
> but it needs careful testing so still need some time.
> 
> Can you help test below efi fix and provide you tested-by if it works?

While it averts the efi=noruntime oops on kdump kernel load, the kernel
does not boot when kdump is triggered.  Bailing in setup_efi_state() in
addition restores functionality.

-Mike

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

Re: [PATCH 1/5 V5] Add a function(ioremap_encrypted) for kdump when AMD sme enabled

[Borislav Petkov]

On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 01:35:28PM +0800, lijiang wrote:
> I personally prefer solution A, which is presented in posted patches.
> What do you think, Boris? And other reviewers?

Ok, thanks for taking the time and effort in explaning this in detail.

Solution B really turns out to be too complex after all. So as long as
that @encrypted argument does not need to propagate any further than a
couple of helpers - as it does now - I guess we can do solution A.

BUT! Wait until next week before sending your patches again because the
merge window isn't over yet.

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
--

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

Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] arm64: export memblock_reserve()d regions via /proc/iomem

[James Morse]

Hi John,

On 21/08/18 20:38, John Stultz wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 3:22 AM, James Morse  wrote:
>> On 08/21/2018 05:39 AM, John Stultz wrote:
>>>
>>> Since this patch landed, on the HiKey board at bootup I'm seeing:
>>>
>>> [0.451884] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 1 at arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c:271
>>> reserve_memblock_reserved_regions+0xd4/0x13c
> ...
>>>  From skimming the patch, it seems this is maybe expected? Or should
>>> this warning raise eyebrows? I can't quite figure it out.
>>

>>> /proc/iomem now has:
>>> ...
>>> 0741-21ef : System RAM
>>>1100-1113cfff : reserved
>>
>>
>>> 21f0-21ff : reserved
>>
>>
>> ^ This entry is what triggered the warning.
>>
>> It expects that meblock_reserved() memory is also described as memory.
>> (memblock keeps them as separate lists, so its possible to reserve
>> memory that doesn't exist... which it looks like your system is doing)
> 
> So yea, I suspect the hikey dts isn't quite right here then.

The DT mem-reserve code goes and memblock_removes() some regions, instead of
marking them nomap.

Given memblock has a for_each_resv_unavail_range() that explicitly walks
reserved && !memory, it looks like this is expected, and its just me thinking
this is strange.

I will come up with a version of this patch that walks the 'System RAM'
resources that were created during boot, and adds the memblock_reserved()
regions to them, which should stop this happening.


Thanks,

James

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