| Message ID | 20170112042143.GF20972@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 01:21:44PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:54:05AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 03:36:28PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:32:48AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 01:36:01PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > > > > @@ -22,6 +25,7 @@ > > > > > extern const unsigned char arm64_relocate_new_kernel[]; > > > > > extern const unsigned long arm64_relocate_new_kernel_size; > > > > > > > > > > +static bool in_crash_kexec; > > > > > > > > Do you actually need this bool? Why not call kexec_crash_loaded() instead? > > > > > > The two have different meanings: > > > "in_crash_kexec" indicates that kdump is taking place, while > > > kexec_crash_loaded() tells us only whether crash dump kernel has been > > > loaded or not. > > > > > > It is crucial to distinguish them especially for machine_kexec() > > > which can be called on normal kexec even if kdump has been set up. > > > > Ah, I see. So how about just doing: > > > > if (kimage == kexec_crash_image) > > > > in machine_kexec? > > Yeah, it should work. > Do you want to merge the following hunk, > or expect that I will re-send the whole patch series > (with other changes if any)? Thanks, I'll fold it in and shout if I run into any problems. My plan is to queue this for 4.11. Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:01:11PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 01:21:44PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:54:05AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 03:36:28PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:32:48AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 01:36:01PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > > > > > @@ -22,6 +25,7 @@ > > > > > > extern const unsigned char arm64_relocate_new_kernel[]; > > > > > > extern const unsigned long arm64_relocate_new_kernel_size; > > > > > > > > > > > > +static bool in_crash_kexec; > > > > > > > > > > Do you actually need this bool? Why not call kexec_crash_loaded() instead? > > > > > > > > The two have different meanings: > > > > "in_crash_kexec" indicates that kdump is taking place, while > > > > kexec_crash_loaded() tells us only whether crash dump kernel has been > > > > loaded or not. > > > > > > > > It is crucial to distinguish them especially for machine_kexec() > > > > which can be called on normal kexec even if kdump has been set up. > > > > > > Ah, I see. So how about just doing: > > > > > > if (kimage == kexec_crash_image) > > > > > > in machine_kexec? > > > > Yeah, it should work. > > Do you want to merge the following hunk, > > or expect that I will re-send the whole patch series > > (with other changes if any)? > > Thanks, I'll fold it in and shout if I run into any problems. My plan is > to queue this for 4.11. Given the DT discussion with Mark, I assume you'll post a new version with this rolled in. Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Will, On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 05:46:34PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 12:01:11PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 01:21:44PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 10:54:05AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 03:36:28PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:32:48AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2016 at 01:36:01PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > > > > > > @@ -22,6 +25,7 @@ > > > > > > > extern const unsigned char arm64_relocate_new_kernel[]; > > > > > > > extern const unsigned long arm64_relocate_new_kernel_size; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > +static bool in_crash_kexec; > > > > > > > > > > > > Do you actually need this bool? Why not call kexec_crash_loaded() instead? > > > > > > > > > > The two have different meanings: > > > > > "in_crash_kexec" indicates that kdump is taking place, while > > > > > kexec_crash_loaded() tells us only whether crash dump kernel has been > > > > > loaded or not. > > > > > > > > > > It is crucial to distinguish them especially for machine_kexec() > > > > > which can be called on normal kexec even if kdump has been set up. > > > > > > > > Ah, I see. So how about just doing: > > > > > > > > if (kimage == kexec_crash_image) > > > > > > > > in machine_kexec? > > > > > > Yeah, it should work. > > > Do you want to merge the following hunk, > > > or expect that I will re-send the whole patch series > > > (with other changes if any)? > > > > Thanks, I'll fold it in and shout if I run into any problems. My plan is > > to queue this for 4.11. > > Given the DT discussion with Mark, I assume you'll post a new version with > this rolled in. Yes, I will! -Takahiro AKASHI > Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
===8<== diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c index 994fe0bc5cc0..c0fc3d458195 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec.c @@ -26,7 +26,6 @@ extern const unsigned char arm64_relocate_new_kernel[]; extern const unsigned long arm64_relocate_new_kernel_size; -static bool in_crash_kexec; static unsigned long kimage_start; /** @@ -154,7 +153,7 @@ void machine_kexec(struct kimage *kimage) * New cpus may have become stuck_in_kernel after we loaded the image. */ BUG_ON((cpus_are_stuck_in_kernel() || (num_online_cpus() > 1)) && - !WARN_ON(in_crash_kexec)); + !WARN_ON(kimage == kexec_crash_image)); reboot_code_buffer_phys = page_to_phys(kimage->control_code_page); reboot_code_buffer = phys_to_virt(reboot_code_buffer_phys); @@ -206,8 +205,8 @@ void machine_kexec(struct kimage *kimage) * relocation is complete. */ - cpu_soft_restart(!in_crash_kexec, reboot_code_buffer_phys, kimage->head, - kimage_start, 0); + cpu_soft_restart(kimage != kexec_crash_image, + reboot_code_buffer_phys, kimage->head, kimage_start, 0); BUG(); /* Should never get here. */ } @@ -250,8 +249,6 @@ void machine_crash_shutdown(struct pt_regs *regs) { local_irq_disable(); - in_crash_kexec = true; - /* shutdown non-crashing cpus */ smp_send_crash_stop();