Message ID | 20160401132535.GP19428@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
On 04/01/16 at 02:25pm, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: [snip] > Well, if we want to remove it, we then need to sort out a method of > specifying a limit on the address - where platforms physical memory > bridges the 4GB CPU-accessible limit, the crashkernel region must be > allocated below that so that it is boot-time accessible. > > Some patches also have boot-time only aliases of RAM, with the normal > alias above 4GB (eg, TI Keystone2) where the running view of RAM is > at 0x800000000, but it has a non-coherent boot alias at 0x80000000. > > I've patches which resolve some of the issues there, and making that > change would make this patch dependent on those changes. So, I > recommend that this patch remains as-is for the time being, and this > issue is addressed in a later patch after the Keystone2 idmap_to_phys() > patches, similar to: > > diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c > index 0a12fcf1aff6..74781e6d4e87 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c > +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c > @@ -962,7 +962,6 @@ late_initcall(init_machine_late); > * zImage relocating below the reserved region. > */ > #define CRASH_ALIGN (128 << 20) > -#define CRASH_ADDR_MAX (PHYS_OFFSET + (512 << 20)) > > static inline unsigned long long get_total_mem(void) > { > @@ -992,7 +991,8 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void) > return; > > if (crash_base <= 0) { > - crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(CRASH_ALIGN, CRASH_ADDR_MAX, > + unsigned long long crash_max = idmap_to_phys((u32)~0); > + crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(CRASH_ALIGN, crash_max, > crash_size, CRASH_ALIGN); > if (!crash_base) { > pr_err("crashkernel reservation failed - No suitable area found.\n"); > > Right now, I don't want to tie this facility to TI Keystone2 support > as what this patch is doing is something that the ARM kexec support > should have been doing since it was first introduced, so folk may > want to backport this change to stable trees. Is it possible for PHYS_OFFSET + (512 << 20) be larger than 4G assume that phys_addr_t is 32bit, if so it can be trunked to a small value then the max will be wrong? Otherwise I think use it temprarily is fine. Thanks Dave
diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c index 0a12fcf1aff6..74781e6d4e87 100644 --- a/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/setup.c @@ -962,7 +962,6 @@ late_initcall(init_machine_late); * zImage relocating below the reserved region. */ #define CRASH_ALIGN (128 << 20) -#define CRASH_ADDR_MAX (PHYS_OFFSET + (512 << 20)) static inline unsigned long long get_total_mem(void) { @@ -992,7 +991,8 @@ static void __init reserve_crashkernel(void) return; if (crash_base <= 0) { - crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(CRASH_ALIGN, CRASH_ADDR_MAX, + unsigned long long crash_max = idmap_to_phys((u32)~0); + crash_base = memblock_find_in_range(CRASH_ALIGN, crash_max, crash_size, CRASH_ALIGN); if (!crash_base) { pr_err("crashkernel reservation failed - No suitable area found.\n");