linux-mm.kvack.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
To: Li Chen <me@linux.beauty>
Cc: Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.com>,
	Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
	Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] liveupdate/kho: Warn when kho_scratch is insufficient for sparsemem
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2025 18:26:28 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aVP9NHDn0WFtkMNP@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251230055345.70035-1-me@linux.beauty>

Hi,

On Tue, Dec 30, 2025 at 01:53:45PM +0800, Li Chen wrote:
> With KHO enabled, the successor kernel can temporarily run memblock in
> scratch-only mode during early boot. In that mode, SPARSEMEM may allocate
> a per-node scratch buffer via sparse_buffer_init(map_count *
> section_map_size()), which requires a single contiguous, aligned memblock
> allocation.
> 
> If the maximum usable scratch range in a node is smaller than the
> estimated buffer size, kexec handover can hang very early in the
> successor kernel, and we may even have no chance to see the error on
> the console.
> 
> Estimate the worst-case per-node requirement from the running kernel's
> sparsemem layout and compare it against the reserved scratch list by
> splitting scratch ranges per nid, sorting and merging them, and applying
> the section_map_size() alignment constraint. Warn once when scratch
> appears too small.
> 
> This check is a heuristic based on the running kernel's sparsemem layout
> and cannot account for all differences in a successor kernel. Keep it as
> a warning instead of rejecting kexec loads to avoid false positives
> causing unexpected regressions. Users can adjust kho_scratch accordingly
> before attempting a handover.
> 
> To reduce boot-time overhead(particularly on large NUMA servers), run
> the check from a late initcall via system_long_wq instead of in
> kho_reserve_scratch().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Li Chen <me@linux.beauty>
> ---
>  kernel/liveupdate/kexec_handover.c | 396 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 396 insertions(+)

This is an overkill for something that a pr_err() or a panic() would be
sufficient.

-- 
Sincerely yours,
Mike.


      reply	other threads:[~2025-12-30 16:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-12-30  5:53 Li Chen
2025-12-30 16:26 ` Mike Rapoport [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=aVP9NHDn0WFtkMNP@kernel.org \
    --to=rppt@kernel.org \
    --cc=graf@amazon.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
    --cc=me@linux.beauty \
    --cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
    --cc=pratyush@kernel.org \
    /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