Groups > linux.kernel > #1181193 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v3] kexec: Make a pair of map and unmap reserved pages when kdump fails to start

Started by	Minfei Huang <mnfhuang@gmail.com>
First post	2015-07-10 06:10 +0200
Last post	2015-07-10 10:30 +0200
Articles	2 — 2 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

  Re: [PATCH v3] kexec: Make a pair of map and unmap reserved pages  when kdump fails to start Minfei Huang <mnfhuang@gmail.com> - 2015-07-10 06:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v3] kexec: Make a pair of map and unmap reserved pages  when kdump fails to start Michael Holzheu <holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2015-07-10 10:30 +0200

#1181193 — Re: [PATCH v3] kexec: Make a pair of map and unmap reserved pages when kdump fails to start

From	Minfei Huang <mnfhuang@gmail.com>
Date	2015-07-10 06:10 +0200
Subject	Re: [PATCH v3] kexec: Make a pair of map and unmap reserved pages when kdump fails to start
Message-ID	<pKxNo-10b-9@gated-at.bofh.it>

On 07/09/15 at 05:54P, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jul 2015 17:18:40 -0400
> Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 09:45:52AM +0800, Minfei Huang wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > I am thinking of moving kernel loading code in a separate function to
> > make things little simpler. Right now it is confusing.
> > 
> > Can you please test attached patch. I have only compile tested it. This
> > is primarily doing what you are doing but in a separate function. It
> > seems more readable now.
> 
> The patch looks good to me. What about the following patch on top
> to make things even more readable?
> ---
>  kernel/kexec.c |   50 +++++++++++++++++---------------------------------
>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/kernel/kexec.c
> +++ b/kernel/kexec.c
> @@ -1236,14 +1236,18 @@ int kexec_load_disabled;
>  
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(kexec_mutex);
>  
> -static int __kexec_load(struct kimage **rimage, unsigned long entry,
> -			unsigned long nr_segments,
> +static int __kexec_load(unsigned long entry, unsigned long nr_segments,
>  			struct kexec_segment __user * segments,
>  			unsigned long flags)
>  {
> +	struct kimage *image, **dest_image;
>  	unsigned long i;
>  	int result;
> -	struct kimage *image;
> +
> +	dest_image = (flags & KEXEC_ON_CRASH) ? &kexec_crash_image : &kexec_image;
> +
> +	if (nr_segments == 0)
> +		return 0;

It is fine, if nr_segments is 0. So we should deal with this case like
original kexec code.

>  
>  	if (flags & KEXEC_ON_CRASH) {
>  		/*
> @@ -1251,7 +1255,6 @@ static int __kexec_load(struct kimage **
>  		 * crashes.  Free any current crash dump kernel before
>  		 * we corrupt it.
>  		 */
> -
>  		kimage_free(xchg(&kexec_crash_image, NULL));
>  	}
>  
> @@ -1267,30 +1270,29 @@ static int __kexec_load(struct kimage **
>  
>  	result = machine_kexec_prepare(image);
>  	if (result)
> -		goto out;
> +		goto fail;
>  
>  	for (i = 0; i < nr_segments; i++) {
>  		result = kimage_load_segment(image, &image->segment[i]);
>  		if (result)
> -			goto out;
> +			goto fail;
>  	}
> -
>  	kimage_terminate(image);
> -	*rimage = image;
> -out:
> +	/* Install the new kernel, and  uninstall the old */
> +	kimage_free(xchg(dest_image, image));
>  	if (flags & KEXEC_ON_CRASH)
>  		crash_unmap_reserved_pages();
> -
> -	/* Free image if there was an error */
> -	if (result)
> -		kimage_free(image);
> +	return 0;
> +fail:
> +	if (flags & KEXEC_ON_CRASH)
> +		crash_unmap_reserved_pages();
> +	kimage_free(image);

Kernel release image again, and will crash in here, since we do not
assign the image to NULL when we release the image above.

Thanks
Minfei

>  	return result;
>  }
>  
>  SYSCALL_DEFINE4(kexec_load, unsigned long, entry, unsigned long, nr_segments,
>  		struct kexec_segment __user *, segments, unsigned long, flags)
>  {
> -	struct kimage **dest_image, *image;
>  	int result;
>  
>  	/* We only trust the superuser with rebooting the system. */
> @@ -1315,9 +1317,6 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(kexec_load, unsigned lon
>  	if (nr_segments > KEXEC_SEGMENT_MAX)
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  
> -	image = NULL;
> -	result = 0;
> -
>  	/* Because we write directly to the reserved memory
>  	 * region when loading crash kernels we need a mutex here to
>  	 * prevent multiple crash  kernels from attempting to load
> @@ -1329,24 +1328,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE4(kexec_load, unsigned lon
>  	if (!mutex_trylock(&kexec_mutex))
>  		return -EBUSY;
>  
> -	dest_image = &kexec_image;
> -	if (flags & KEXEC_ON_CRASH)
> -		dest_image = &kexec_crash_image;
> -
>  	/* Load new kernel */
> -	if (nr_segments > 0) {
> -		result = __kexec_load(&image, entry, nr_segments, segments,
> -				      flags);
> -		if (result)
> -			goto out;
> -	}
> -
> -	/* Install the new kernel, and  Uninstall the old */
> -	image = xchg(dest_image, image);
> -
> -out:
> +	result = __kexec_load(entry, nr_segments, segments, flags);
>  	mutex_unlock(&kexec_mutex);
> -	kimage_free(image);
>  
>  	return result;
>  }
> 
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1181365

From	Michael Holzheu <holzheu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date	2015-07-10 10:30 +0200
Message-ID	<pKBR0-3yi-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to	#1181193

On Fri, 10 Jul 2015 12:05:27 +0800
Minfei Huang <mnfhuang@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 07/09/15 at 05:54P, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Jul 2015 17:18:40 -0400
> > Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 09:45:52AM +0800, Minfei Huang wrote:
> > 
> > [snip]
> > 
> > > I am thinking of moving kernel loading code in a separate function to
> > > make things little simpler. Right now it is confusing.
> > > 
> > > Can you please test attached patch. I have only compile tested it. This
> > > is primarily doing what you are doing but in a separate function. It
> > > seems more readable now.
> > 
> > The patch looks good to me. What about the following patch on top
> > to make things even more readable?
> > ---
> >  kernel/kexec.c |   50 +++++++++++++++++---------------------------------
> >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> > 
> > --- a/kernel/kexec.c
> > +++ b/kernel/kexec.c
> > @@ -1236,14 +1236,18 @@ int kexec_load_disabled;
> >  
> >  static DEFINE_MUTEX(kexec_mutex);
> >  
> > -static int __kexec_load(struct kimage **rimage, unsigned long entry,
> > -			unsigned long nr_segments,
> > +static int __kexec_load(unsigned long entry, unsigned long nr_segments,
> >  			struct kexec_segment __user * segments,
> >  			unsigned long flags)
> >  {
> > +	struct kimage *image, **dest_image;
> >  	unsigned long i;
> >  	int result;
> > -	struct kimage *image;
> > +
> > +	dest_image = (flags & KEXEC_ON_CRASH) ? &kexec_crash_image : &kexec_image;
> > +
> > +	if (nr_segments == 0)
> > +		return 0;
> 
> It is fine, if nr_segments is 0. So we should deal with this case like
> original kexec code.
> 
> >  
> >  	if (flags & KEXEC_ON_CRASH) {
> >  		/*
> > @@ -1251,7 +1255,6 @@ static int __kexec_load(struct kimage **
> >  		 * crashes.  Free any current crash dump kernel before
> >  		 * we corrupt it.
> >  		 */
> > -
> >  		kimage_free(xchg(&kexec_crash_image, NULL));
> >  	}
> >  
> > @@ -1267,30 +1270,29 @@ static int __kexec_load(struct kimage **
> >  
> >  	result = machine_kexec_prepare(image);
> >  	if (result)
> > -		goto out;
> > +		goto fail;
> >  
> >  	for (i = 0; i < nr_segments; i++) {
> >  		result = kimage_load_segment(image, &image->segment[i]);
> >  		if (result)
> > -			goto out;
> > +			goto fail;
> >  	}
> > -
> >  	kimage_terminate(image);
> > -	*rimage = image;
> > -out:
> > +	/* Install the new kernel, and  uninstall the old */
> > +	kimage_free(xchg(dest_image, image));
> >  	if (flags & KEXEC_ON_CRASH)
> >  		crash_unmap_reserved_pages();
> > -
> > -	/* Free image if there was an error */
> > -	if (result)
> > -		kimage_free(image);
> > +	return 0;
> > +fail:
> > +	if (flags & KEXEC_ON_CRASH)
> > +		crash_unmap_reserved_pages();
> > +	kimage_free(image);
> 
> Kernel release image again

Again? This is only done in the error case.

> , and will crash in here, since we do not
> assign the image to NULL when we release the image above.

Good catch, I should have set image=NULL at the beginning of __kexec_load().

Michael

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

csiph-web

Re: [PATCH v3] kexec: Make a pair of map and unmap reserved pages when kdump fails to start

Contents

#1181193 — Re: [PATCH v3] kexec: Make a pair of map and unmap reserved pages when kdump fails to start

#1181365