RE: [PATCH] To crash dump, we need keep other memory type exceptE820_RAM, because other type come from BIOS or firmware is used by othercode(for example: PCI_MMCONFIG).

[Zhang, Jun]

Hello, Anvin
  You are right. Thanks!

Hello, All
  Please review it again. Thanks!

From bf7506ac7e9ce0df0b915164dbb7a6d858ef2e40 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: jzha144 <jun.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 08:51:18 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] When we are doing a crash dump, we still need non-E820_RAM
 memory type address information in order to do I/O. so only
 remove all RAM ranges which need to be dumped.

Signed-off-by: jzha144 <jun.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/e820.c |    9 +++++++++
 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c b/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
index df06ade..77be839 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
@@ -851,6 +851,15 @@ static int __init parse_memmap_opt(char *p)
 		 * reset.
 		 */
 		saved_max_pfn = e820_end_of_ram_pfn();
+
+		/*
+		 * We are doing a crash dump, so remove all RAM ranges
+		 * as they are the ones that need to be dumped.
+		 * We still need all non-RAM information in order to do I/O.
+		 */
+		e820_remove_range(0, ULLONG_MAX, E820_RAM, 1);
+		userdef = 1;
+		return 0;
 #endif
 		e820.nr_map = 0;
 		userdef = 1;
-- 
1.7.6

Best Regards!
Zhang, jun

-----Original Message-----
From: H. Peter Anvin [mailto:hpa@xxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 12:38 PM
To: Zhang, Jun
Cc: Thomas Gleixner; Ingo Molnar; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; Andrew Morton; Fleming, Matt; Paul Gortmaker; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] To crash dump, we need keep other memory type except E820_RAM, because other type come from BIOS or firmware is used by other code(for example: PCI_MMCONFIG).

On 10/30/2012 08:39 PM, Zhang, Jun wrote:
> Hello, Anvin
> Thanks!
>
> Hello, all
> Next is my the latest version, please review it.
> Thanks!

You're still starting in the wrong end which is confusing for the reader.

What you probably want to say is something more like:

"We are doing a crash dump, so remove all RAM ranges as they are the ones that need to be dumped.  We still need all non-RAM information in order to do I/O."

At that point it should be pretty obvious that the patch is wrong.  What if we are *not* doing a crash dump?  Just because crash dump is compiled in doesn't mean that that is what we are doing right now.

	-hpa

>  From 141546c77ff7be523a9e72f5259df4a6827f2c1a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 
> 2001
> From: jzha144 <jun.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 08:51:18 +0800
> Subject: [PATCH] If we are doing a crash dump, we still need non-E820_RAM
>   memory type address information, which come from BIOS or
>   firmware. for example: PCI_MMCONFIG check this address.
>
> Signed-off-by: jzha144 <jun.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>   arch/x86/kernel/e820.c |    9 +++++++++
>   1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c b/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c index 
> df06ade..f8672d0 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/e820.c
> @@ -851,6 +851,15 @@ static int __init parse_memmap_opt(char *p)
>   		 * reset.
>   		 */
>   		saved_max_pfn = e820_end_of_ram_pfn();
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * If we are doing a crash dump, we still need non-E820_RAM
> +		 * memory type address information. so we only remove
> +		 * E820_RAM type.
> +		 */
> +		e820_remove_range(0, ULLONG_MAX, E820_RAM, 1);
> +		userdef = 1;
> +		return 0;
>   #endif
>   		e820.nr_map = 0;
>   		userdef = 1;
>


--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

N‹§²æìr¸›yúèšØb²X¬¶ÇvØ^–)Þ{.nÇ+‰·¥Š{±‘êçzX§¶›¡Ü}©ž²ÆzÚ&j:+v‰¨¾«‘êçzZ+€Ê+zf£¢·hšˆ§~†­†Ûiÿûàz¹®w¥¢¸?™¨è­Ú&¢)ßf”ù^jÇy§m…á@A«a¶Úÿ0¶ìh®å’i