[PATCH v18 5/7] kexec: exclude hot remove cpu from elfcorehdr notes
Sourabh Jain
sourabhjain at linux.ibm.com
Mon Feb 6 00:12:06 PST 2023
Hello Thomas,
On 01/02/23 17:03, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Eric!
>
> On Tue, Jan 31 2023 at 17:42, Eric DeVolder wrote:
>> --- a/kernel/crash_core.c
>> +++ b/kernel/crash_core.c
>> @@ -366,6 +366,14 @@ int crash_prepare_elf64_headers(struct kimage *image, struct crash_mem *mem,
>>
>> /* Prepare one phdr of type PT_NOTE for each present CPU */
>> for_each_present_cpu(cpu) {
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_CRASH_HOTPLUG
>> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HOTPLUG_CPU)) {
>> + /* Skip the soon-to-be offlined cpu */
>> + if ((image->hp_action == KEXEC_CRASH_HP_REMOVE_CPU) &&
>> + (cpu == image->offlinecpu))
>> + continue;
>> + }
>> +#endif
> I'm failing to see how the above is correct in any way. Look at the
> following sequence of events:
>
> 1) Offline CPU$N
>
> -> Prepare elf headers with CPU$N excluded
>
> 2) Another hotplug operation != 'Online CPU$N'
>
> -> Prepare elf headers with CPU$N included
>
> Also in case of loading the crash kernel in the situation where not all
> present CPUs are online (think boot time SMT disable) then your
> resulting crash image will contain all present CPUs and none of the
> offline CPUs are excluded.
>
> How does that make any sense at all?
>
> This image->hp_action and image->offlinecpu dance is engineering
> voodoo. You just can do:
>
> for_each_present_cpu(cpu) {
> if (!cpu_online(cpu))
> continue;
> do_stuff(cpu);
>
> which does the right thing in all situations and can be further
> simplified to:
>
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> do_stuff(cpu);
What will be the implication on x86 if we pack PT_NOTE for possible CPUs?
IIUC, on boot the crash notes are create for possible CPUs using pcpu_alloc
and when the system is on crash path the crash notes for online CPUs is
populated with the required data and rest crash notes are untouched.
And I think the /proc/vmcore generation in kdump/second kernel and
makedumpfile do
take care of empty crash notes belong to offline CPUs.
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Sourabh
More information about the kexec
mailing list