Re: [PATCH v10 08/14] arm64: kexec_file: load initrd and device-tree

[AKASHI Takahiro]

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 04:25:03PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Akashi,
> 
> On 10/07/18 08:37, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 05:32:09PM +0100, James Morse wrote:
> >> On 23/06/18 03:20, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> >>> load_other_segments() is expected to allocate and place all the necessary
> >>> memory segments other than kernel, including initrd and device-tree
> >>> blob (and elf core header for crash).
> >>> While most of the code was borrowed from kexec-tools' counterpart,
> >>> users may not be allowed to specify dtb explicitly, instead, the dtb
> >>> presented by the original boot loader is reused.
> >>>
> >>> arch_kimage_kernel_post_load_cleanup() is responsible for freeing arm64-
> >>> specific data allocated in load_other_segments().
> 
> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c
> >>> index c38a8048ed00..7115c4f915dc 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c
> >>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c
> >>
> >>> +static int setup_dtb(struct kimage *image,
> >>> +		unsigned long initrd_load_addr, unsigned long initrd_len,
> >>> +		char *cmdline, unsigned long cmdline_len,
> >>> +		char **dtb_buf, size_t *dtb_buf_len)
> >>> +{
> 
> [..]
> 
> >>> +	/* add bootargs */
> >>> +	if (cmdline) {
> >>> +		ret = fdt_setprop(buf, nodeoffset, "bootargs",
> >>> +						cmdline, cmdline_len + 1);
> >>> +		if (ret)
> >>> +			goto out_err;
> >>> +	}
> >>
> >> So (cmdline_len == 0) from user-space means keep the old cmdline. Sounds
> >> sensible. Is this documented anywhere?
> 
> > To be a bit surprise, --append (and --cmdline) option belongs to arch-
> > specific options in terms of implementation. Apparently, a standard man page
> > of kexec(8) say little about it, in particular, for device-tree-based system.
> > 
> > As far as arm64 is concerned, the fact is a bit complicated.
> > User space kexec accepts --append as well as --reuse-cmdline, and
> > along with yet another --dtb option, a resulting command line for new
> > kernel (or bootargs in new dtb) would look to be:
> > 
> > 	--append=A | --reuse-cmdline |     --dtb
> > 		   |                 |   n    |    y(bootargs=B)
> > 
> > 	    n            n               S(*1)      B(*2)
> > 	    n            y               S          S(*3)
> > 	    y            n               A          A
> > 	    y            y              S+A        S+A(*4)
> > 
> >       where S: the cmdline parameters of the running system
> > 		 (equal to bootargs in system's dtb)
> 
> (I'm afraid I don't understand this table, but the text below helps...)

(Really? I believed that it was obvious.)

> 
> > You are talking about case(1) above.
> > 
> > Given that we can have an explicit option, --reuse-cmdline, the cmdline
> > in (1) should be NULL. Meanwhile, we specify --dtb here, which means
> > that we want to re-use system's dtb, implying that we also want to
> > reuse a cmdline parameter. (This can be arguable, though)
> 
> Sounds like this is all user-space's problem!

I dare not say it's a bug :)

> 
> > So I would say that we have both reasons to go for and go against.
> > 
> > # Likewise,
> > # I wonder why the cmdnline would not be B or A+B, respectively,
> > in case of (3) and (4). But it's a different issue.
> > 
> >> powerpc does the opposite, it deletes the bootargs in this case. Are we happy
> >> making his a per-arch thing?
> > 
> > My compromise solution is:
> > a.to maintain compatibility with powerpc at system call level, 
> 
> This sounds like the right thing to do.
> 
> 
> >   that is,
> >   replacing bootargs in new dtb if user explicitly specifies cmdline
> >   argument, otherwise nullifying bootargs,
> > b.yet maintain compatibility with arm64's kexec behavior at command line
> >   interface level. If neither --append nor --dtb is not specified,
> >   user space kexec will reuse the system's command line whether or not
> >   --reuse-cmdline is used.
> 
> (a and b aren't options this time: you're proposing to do a-and-b)

Yes.

> 
> > (Do you follow me?)
> 
> I think so:
> The syscall will behave the same as powerpc meaning the kernel will never re-use
> the existing cmdline in the dtb, even if that means (trying to) boot without one.
> 
> If user-space wants to re-use the command line, it should read /proc/cmdline and
> feed the string back into the kernel.

Thank you for rephrasing.

> 
> > So kexec and kexec_file on arm64 will still behave in exactly the same way,
> > but differently from ppc at command level for now.
> 
> > The point is that, if we might want or need to change this behavior
> > (at any time in the future), we would only have to modify user space kexec.
> > Kernel semantics will never break.
> > 
> > (b) requires additional small modification on kexec-tools, but kexec_file
> > support is yet to be upstreamed anyway.
> 
> Makes sense!

The next version will go with this approach.

-Takahiro AKASHI

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> James