From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: Ross Zwisler <zwisler@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@suse.de>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: collision between ZONE_MOVABLE and memblock allocations
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 11:41:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <73db2622-4985-2f93-a118-d7d249094239@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZMIoQIS1t53XE4Kw@dhcp22.suse.cz>
On 27.07.23 10:18, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Wed 26-07-23 10:44:21, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 20.07.23 00:48, Ross Zwisler wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 08:14:48AM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote:
>>>> On Tue 18-07-23 16:01:06, Ross Zwisler wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>>> I do think that we need to fix this collision between ZONE_MOVABLE and memmap
>>>>> allocations, because this issue essentially makes the movablecore= kernel
>>>>> command line parameter useless in many cases, as the ZONE_MOVABLE region it
>>>>> creates will often actually be unmovable.
>>>>
>>>> movablecore is kinda hack and I would be more inclined to get rid of it
>>>> rather than build more into it. Could you be more specific about your
>>>> use case?
>>>
>>> The problem that I'm trying to solve is that I'd like to be able to get kernel
>>> core dumps off machines (chromebooks) so that we can debug crashes. Because
>>> the memory used by the crash kernel ("crashkernel=" kernel command line
>>> option) is consumed the entire time the machine is booted, there is a strong
>>> motivation to keep the crash kernel as small and as simple as possible. To
>>> this end I'm trying to get away without SSD drivers, not having to worry about
>>> encryption on the SSDs, etc.
>>
>> Okay, so you intend to keep the crashkernel area as small as possible.
>>
>>>
>>> So, the rough plan right now is:
>>> > 1) During boot set aside some memory that won't contain kernel
>> allocations.
>>> I'm trying to do this now with ZONE_MOVABLE, but I'm open to better ways.
>>>
>>> We set aside memory for a crash kernel & arm it so that the ZONE_MOVABLE
>>> region (or whatever non-kernel region) will be set aside as PMEM in the crash
>>> kernel. This is done with the memmap=nn[KMG]!ss[KMG] kernel command line
>>> parameter passed to the crash kernel.
>>>
>>> So, in my sample 4G VM system, I see:
>>>
>>> # lsmem --split ZONES --output-all
>>> RANGE SIZE STATE REMOVABLE BLOCK NODE ZONES
>>> 0x0000000000000000-0x0000000007ffffff 128M online yes 0 0 None
>>> 0x0000000008000000-0x00000000bfffffff 2.9G online yes 1-23 0 DMA32
>>> 0x0000000100000000-0x000000012fffffff 768M online yes 32-37 0 Normal
>>> 0x0000000130000000-0x000000013fffffff 256M online yes 38-39 0 Movable
>>> Memory block size: 128M
>>> Total online memory: 4G
>>> Total offline memory: 0B
>>>
>>> so I'll pass "memmap=256M!0x130000000" to the crash kernel.
>>>
>>> 2) When we hit a kernel crash, we know (hope?) that the PMEM region we've set
>>> aside only contains user data, which we don't want to store anyway.
>>
>> I raised that in different context already, but such assumptions are not
>> 100% future proof IMHO. For example, we might at one point be able to make
>> user page tables movable and place them on there.
>>
>> But yes, most kernel data structures (which you care about) will probably
>> never be movable and never end up on these regions.
>>
>>> We make a
>>> filesystem in there, and create a kernel crash dump using 'makedumpfile':
>>>
>>> mkfs.ext4 /dev/pmem0
>>> mount /dev/pmem0 /mnt
>>> makedumpfile -c -d 31 /proc/vmcore /mnt/kdump
>>>
>>> We then set up the next full kernel boot to also have this same PMEM region,
>>> using the same memmap kernel parameter. We reboot back into a full kernel.
>>>
>>> 3) The next full kernel will be a normal boot with a full networking stack,
>>> SSD drivers, disk encryption, etc. We mount up our PMEM filesystem, pull out
>>> the kdump and either store it somewhere persistent or upload it somewhere. We
>>> can then unmount the PMEM and reconfigure it back to system ram so that the
>>> live system isn't missing memory.
>>>
>>> ndctl create-namespace --reconfig=namespace0.0 -m devdax -f
>>> daxctl reconfigure-device --mode=system-ram dax0.0
>>>
>>> This is the flow I'm trying to support, and have mostly working in a VM,
>>> except up until now makedumpfile would crash because all the memblock
>>> structures it needed were in the PMEM area that I had just wiped out by making
>>> a new filesystem. :)
>>
>>
>> Thinking out loud (and remembering that some architectures relocate the
>> crashkernel during kexec, if I am not wrong), maybe the following would also
>> work and make your setup eventually easier:
>>
>> 1) Don't reserve a crashkernel area in the traditional way, instead reserve
>> that area using CMA. It can be used for MOVABLE allocations.
>>
>> 2) Let kexec load the crashkernel+initrd into ordinary memory only
>> (consuming as much as you would need there).
>>
>> 3) On kexec, relocate the crashkernel+initrd into the CMA area (overwriting
>> any movable data in there)
>>
>> 4) In makedumpfile, don't dump any memory that falls into the crashkernel
>> area. It might already have been overwritten by the second kernel
>
> This is more or less what Jiri is looking into.
>
Ah, very nice.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-27 9:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-18 22:01 Ross Zwisler
2023-07-19 5:44 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-07-19 22:26 ` Ross Zwisler
2023-07-21 11:20 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-07-26 7:49 ` Michal Hocko
2023-07-26 10:48 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-07-26 12:57 ` Michal Hocko
2023-07-26 13:23 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-07-26 14:23 ` Michal Hocko
2023-07-19 6:14 ` Michal Hocko
2023-07-19 7:59 ` Mike Rapoport
2023-07-19 8:06 ` Michal Hocko
2023-07-19 8:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-19 23:05 ` Ross Zwisler
2023-07-26 8:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-19 22:48 ` Ross Zwisler
2023-07-20 7:49 ` Michal Hocko
2023-07-20 12:13 ` Michal Hocko
2023-07-24 16:56 ` Ross Zwisler
2023-07-26 8:44 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-26 13:08 ` David Hildenbrand
2023-07-27 8:18 ` Michal Hocko
2023-07-27 9:41 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=73db2622-4985-2f93-a118-d7d249094239@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=mgorman@suse.de \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
--cc=zwisler@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox