On 03/21/17 at 10:18pm, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Dave Young <dyoung@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:Yes, need careful review from s390 and maybe ppc64 especially about
On 03/20/17 at 10:33pm, Eric W. Biederman wrote:We also need to take a close look at what s390 is doing with vmcoreinfo.
Xunlei Pang <xlpang@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:I think makedumpfile is using it, but I also vote to remove the
As Eric said,Can you preceed this patch with a patch that removes CRASHTIME from
"what we need to do is move the variable vmcoreinfo_note out
of the kernel's .bss section. And modify the code to regenerate
and keep this information in something like the control page.
Definitely something like this needs a page all to itself, and ideally
far away from any other kernel data structures. I clearly was not
watching closely the data someone decided to keep this silly thing
in the kernel's .bss section."
This patch allocates extra pages for these vmcoreinfo_XXX variables,
one advantage is that it enhances some safety of vmcoreinfo, because
vmcoreinfo now is kept far away from other kernel data structures.
vmcoreinfo? If someone actually cares we can add a separate note that holds
a 64bit crashtime in the per cpu notes.
CRASHTIME. It is better not to do this while crashing and a makedumpfile
userspace patch is needed to drop the use of it.
As we are looking at reliability concerns removing CRASHTIME should makeIt is a nice improvement..
everything in vmcoreinfo a boot time constant. Which should simplify
everything considerably.
As apparently it is reading it in a different kind of crashdump process.
patch 2/3, better to have comments from IBM about s390 dump tool and ppc
fadump. Added more cc.