- Resending the v5 version as Will Deacon reported that the patchset was
split into two seperate threads while sending out. It was an issue
with my 'msmtp' settings which seems to be now fixed. Please ignore
all previous v5 versions.
Changes since v4:
----------------
- v4 can be seen here:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/023961.html
- Addressed comments from Dave and added patches for documenting
new variables appended to vmcoreinfo documentation.
- Added testing report shared by Akashi for PATCH 2/5.
Changes since v3:
----------------
- v3 can be seen here:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-March/022590.html
- Addressed comments from James and exported TCR_EL1.T1SZ in vmcoreinfo
instead of PTRS_PER_PGD.
- Added a new patch (via [PATCH 3/3]), which fixes a simple typo in
'Documentation/arm64/memory.rst'
Changes since v2:
----------------
- v2 can be seen here:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-March/022531.html
- Protected 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' vmcoreinfo variable under CONFIG_SPARSEMEM
ifdef sections, as suggested by Kazu.
- Updated vmcoreinfo documentation to add description about
'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' variable (via [PATCH 3/3]).
Changes since v1:
----------------
- v1 was sent out as a single patch which can be seen here:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-February/022411.html
- v2 breaks the single patch into two independent patches:
[PATCH 1/2] appends 'PTRS_PER_PGD' to vmcoreinfo for arm64 arch, whereas
[PATCH 2/2] appends 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' to vmcoreinfo in core kernel code (all archs)
This patchset primarily fixes the regression reported in user-space
utilities like 'makedumpfile' and 'crash-utility' on arm64 architecture
with the availability of 52-bit address space feature in underlying
kernel. These regressions have been reported both on CPUs which don't
support ARMv8.2 extensions (i.e. LVA, LPA) and are running newer kernels
and also on prototype platforms (like ARMv8 FVP simulator model) which
support ARMv8.2 extensions and are running newer kernels.
The reason for these regressions is that right now user-space tools
have no direct access to these values (since these are not exported
from the kernel) and hence need to rely on a best-guess method of
determining value of 'vabits_actual' and 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' supported
by underlying kernel.
Exporting these values via vmcoreinfo will help user-land in such cases.
In addition, as per suggestion from makedumpfile maintainer (Kazu),
it makes more sense to append 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' to
vmcoreinfo in the core code itself rather than in arm64 arch-specific
code, so that the user-space code for other archs can also benefit from
this addition to the vmcoreinfo and use it as a standard way of
determining 'SECTIONS_SHIFT' value in user-land.
Cc: Boris Petkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <[email protected]>
Cc: James Morse <[email protected]>
Cc: Mark Rutland <[email protected]>
Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
Cc: Steve Capper <[email protected]>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <[email protected]>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
Cc: Dave Anderson <[email protected]>
Cc: Kazuhito Hagio <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Bhupesh Sharma (5):
crash_core, vmcoreinfo: Append 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' to vmcoreinfo
arm64/crash_core: Export TCR_EL1.T1SZ in vmcoreinfo
Documentation/arm64: Fix a simple typo in memory.rst
Documentation/vmcoreinfo: Add documentation for 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS'
Documentation/vmcoreinfo: Add documentation for 'TCR_EL1.T1SZ'
Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst | 11 +++++++++++
Documentation/arm64/memory.rst | 2 +-
arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h | 1 +
arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c | 9 +++++++++
kernel/crash_core.c | 1 +
5 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--
2.7.4
Right now user-space tools like 'makedumpfile' and 'crash' need to rely
on a best-guess method of determining value of 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS'
supported by underlying kernel.
This value is used in user-space code to calculate the bit-space
required to store a section for SPARESMEM (similar to the existing
calculation method used in the kernel implementation):
#define SECTIONS_SHIFT (MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS - SECTION_SIZE_BITS)
Now, regressions have been reported in user-space utilities
like 'makedumpfile' and 'crash' on arm64, with the recently added
kernel support for 52-bit physical address space, as there is
no clear method of determining this value in user-space
(other than reading kernel CONFIG flags).
As per suggestion from makedumpfile maintainer (Kazu), it makes more
sense to append 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' to vmcoreinfo in the core code itself
rather than in arch-specific code, so that the user-space code for other
archs can also benefit from this addition to the vmcoreinfo and use it
as a standard way of determining 'SECTIONS_SHIFT' value in user-land.
A reference 'makedumpfile' implementation which reads the
'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' value from vmcoreinfo in a arch-independent fashion
is available here:
[0]. https://github.com/bhupesh-sharma/makedumpfile/blob/remove-max-phys-mem-bit-v1/arch/ppc64.c#L471
Cc: Boris Petkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Cc: James Morse <[email protected]>
Cc: Mark Rutland <[email protected]>
Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
Cc: Steve Capper <[email protected]>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <[email protected]>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
Cc: Dave Anderson <[email protected]>
Cc: Kazuhito Hagio <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <[email protected]>
---
kernel/crash_core.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/kernel/crash_core.c b/kernel/crash_core.c
index 9f1557b98468..18175687133a 100644
--- a/kernel/crash_core.c
+++ b/kernel/crash_core.c
@@ -413,6 +413,7 @@ static int __init crash_save_vmcoreinfo_init(void)
VMCOREINFO_LENGTH(mem_section, NR_SECTION_ROOTS);
VMCOREINFO_STRUCT_SIZE(mem_section);
VMCOREINFO_OFFSET(mem_section, section_mem_map);
+ VMCOREINFO_NUMBER(MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS);
#endif
VMCOREINFO_STRUCT_SIZE(page);
VMCOREINFO_STRUCT_SIZE(pglist_data);
--
2.7.4
vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
spaces.
If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of address
space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to 48-bit
at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
variable can change in future kernel versions, but the architectural
constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate intended
specific fields to user-space.
User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo for determining if a virtual
address lies in the linear map range.
The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies in
the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
#define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) & BIT(vabits_actual - 1)))
I have sent out user-space patches for makedumpfile and crash-utility
to add features for obtaining vabits_actual value from TCR_EL1.T1SZ (see
[0] and [1]).
Akashi reported that he was able to use this patchset and the user-space
changes to get user-space working fine with the 52-bit kernel VA
changes (see [2]).
[0]. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/023966.html
[1]. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/024006.html
[2]. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/023992.html
Cc: James Morse <[email protected]>
Cc: Mark Rutland <[email protected]>
Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
Cc: Steve Capper <[email protected]>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]>
Cc: Dave Anderson <[email protected]>
Cc: Kazuhito Hagio <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h | 1 +
arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c | 9 +++++++++
2 files changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h
index d9fbd433cc17..d2e7aff5821e 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/pgtable-hwdef.h
@@ -215,6 +215,7 @@
#define TCR_TxSZ(x) (TCR_T0SZ(x) | TCR_T1SZ(x))
#define TCR_TxSZ_WIDTH 6
#define TCR_T0SZ_MASK (((UL(1) << TCR_TxSZ_WIDTH) - 1) << TCR_T0SZ_OFFSET)
+#define TCR_T1SZ_MASK (((UL(1) << TCR_TxSZ_WIDTH) - 1) << TCR_T1SZ_OFFSET)
#define TCR_EPD0_SHIFT 7
#define TCR_EPD0_MASK (UL(1) << TCR_EPD0_SHIFT)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
index ca4c3e12d8c5..f78310ba65ea 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
@@ -7,6 +7,13 @@
#include <linux/crash_core.h>
#include <asm/memory.h>
+static inline u64 get_tcr_el1_t1sz(void);
+
+static inline u64 get_tcr_el1_t1sz(void)
+{
+ return (read_sysreg(tcr_el1) & TCR_T1SZ_MASK) >> TCR_T1SZ_OFFSET;
+}
+
void arch_crash_save_vmcoreinfo(void)
{
VMCOREINFO_NUMBER(VA_BITS);
@@ -15,5 +22,7 @@ void arch_crash_save_vmcoreinfo(void)
kimage_voffset);
vmcoreinfo_append_str("NUMBER(PHYS_OFFSET)=0x%llx\n",
PHYS_OFFSET);
+ vmcoreinfo_append_str("NUMBER(tcr_el1_t1sz)=0x%llx\n",
+ get_tcr_el1_t1sz());
vmcoreinfo_append_str("KERNELOFFSET=%lx\n", kaslr_offset());
}
--
2.7.4
Add documentation for 'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' variable being added to
vmcoreinfo.
'MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS' defines the maximum supported physical address
space memory.
Cc: Boris Petkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Cc: James Morse <[email protected]>
Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <[email protected]>
Cc: Paul Mackerras <[email protected]>
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
Cc: Dave Anderson <[email protected]>
Cc: Kazuhito Hagio <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
index 007a6b86e0ee..447b64314f56 100644
--- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
+++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
@@ -93,6 +93,11 @@ It exists in the sparse memory mapping model, and it is also somewhat
similar to the mem_map variable, both of them are used to translate an
address.
+MAX_PHYSMEM_BITS
+----------------
+
+Defines the maximum supported physical address space memory.
+
page
----
--
2.7.4
Fix a simple typo in arm64/memory.rst
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <[email protected]>
Cc: James Morse <[email protected]>
Cc: Mark Rutland <[email protected]>
Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
Cc: Steve Capper <[email protected]>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/arm64/memory.rst | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/arm64/memory.rst b/Documentation/arm64/memory.rst
index 02e02175e6f5..cf03b3290800 100644
--- a/Documentation/arm64/memory.rst
+++ b/Documentation/arm64/memory.rst
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ this logic.
As a single binary will need to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
spaces, the VMEMMAP must be sized large enough for 52-bit VAs and
-also must be sized large enought to accommodate a fixed PAGE_OFFSET.
+also must be sized large enough to accommodate a fixed PAGE_OFFSET.
Most code in the kernel should not need to consider the VA_BITS, for
code that does need to know the VA size the variables are
--
2.7.4
Add documentation for TCR_EL1.T1SZ variable being added to
vmcoreinfo.
It indicates the size offset of the memory region addressed by TTBR1_EL1
and hence can be used for determining the vabits_actual value.
Cc: James Morse <[email protected]>
Cc: Mark Rutland <[email protected]>
Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
Cc: Steve Capper <[email protected]>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <[email protected]>
Cc: Dave Anderson <[email protected]>
Cc: Kazuhito Hagio <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Bhupesh Sharma <[email protected]>
---
Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
index 447b64314f56..f9349f9d3345 100644
--- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
+++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
@@ -398,6 +398,12 @@ KERNELOFFSET
The kernel randomization offset. Used to compute the page offset. If
KASLR is disabled, this value is zero.
+TCR_EL1.T1SZ
+------------
+
+Indicates the size offset of the memory region addressed by TTBR1_EL1
+and hence can be used for determining the vabits_actual value.
+
arm
===
--
2.7.4
Hi Bhupesh,
On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
> spaces.
>
> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of address
> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to 48-bit
> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
>
> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the architectural
> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate intended
> specific fields to user-space.
>
> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
(write?)
> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to know this.
> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies in
> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
>
> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) & BIT(vabits_actual - 1)))
This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA space"). If user-space
tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to constantly be fixed
and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something that ends up as ABI.
I think a better argument is walking the kernel page tables from the core dump.
Core code's vmcoreinfo exports the location of the kernel page tables, but in the example
above you can't walk them without knowing how T1SZ was configured.
On older kernels, user-space that needs this would have to assume the value it computes
from VA_BITs (also in vmcoreinfo) is the value in use.
---%<---
> I have sent out user-space patches for makedumpfile and crash-utility
> to add features for obtaining vabits_actual value from TCR_EL1.T1SZ (see
> [0] and [1]).
>
> Akashi reported that he was able to use this patchset and the user-space
> changes to get user-space working fine with the 52-bit kernel VA
> changes (see [2]).
>
> [0]. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/023966.html
> [1]. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/024006.html
> [2]. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/023992.html
---%<---
This probably belongs in the cover letter instead of the commit log.
(From-memory: one of vmcore/kcore is virtually addressed, the other physically. Does this
fix your poblem in both cases?)
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
> index ca4c3e12d8c5..f78310ba65ea 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
> @@ -7,6 +7,13 @@
> #include <linux/crash_core.h>
> #include <asm/memory.h>
You need to include asm/sysreg.h for read_sysreg(), and asm/pgtable-hwdef.h for the macros
you added.
> +static inline u64 get_tcr_el1_t1sz(void);
Why do you need to do this?
> +static inline u64 get_tcr_el1_t1sz(void)
> +{
> + return (read_sysreg(tcr_el1) & TCR_T1SZ_MASK) >> TCR_T1SZ_OFFSET;
> +}
(We don't modify this one, and its always the same one very CPU, so this is fine.
This function is only called once when the stringy vmcoreinfo elf_note is created...)
> void arch_crash_save_vmcoreinfo(void)
> {
> VMCOREINFO_NUMBER(VA_BITS);
> @@ -15,5 +22,7 @@ void arch_crash_save_vmcoreinfo(void)
> kimage_voffset);
> vmcoreinfo_append_str("NUMBER(PHYS_OFFSET)=0x%llx\n",
> PHYS_OFFSET);
> + vmcoreinfo_append_str("NUMBER(tcr_el1_t1sz)=0x%llx\n",
> + get_tcr_el1_t1sz());
You document the name as being upper-case.
The two values either values either side are upper-case.
> vmcoreinfo_append_str("KERNELOFFSET=%lx\n", kaslr_offset());
> }
Thanks,
James
Hi Bhupesh,
On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Add documentation for TCR_EL1.T1SZ variable being added to
> vmcoreinfo.
>
> It indicates the size offset of the memory region addressed by TTBR1_EL1
> and hence can be used for determining the vabits_actual value.
used for determining random-internal-kernel-variable, that might not exist tomorrow.
Could you describe how this is useful/necessary if a debugger wants to walk the page
tables from the core file? I think this is a better argument.
Wouldn't the documentation be better as part of the patch that adds the export?
(... unless these have to go via different trees? ..)
> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
> index 447b64314f56..f9349f9d3345 100644
> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
> @@ -398,6 +398,12 @@ KERNELOFFSET
> The kernel randomization offset. Used to compute the page offset. If
> KASLR is disabled, this value is zero.
>
> +TCR_EL1.T1SZ
> +------------
> +
> +Indicates the size offset of the memory region addressed by TTBR1_EL1
> +and hence can be used for determining the vabits_actual value.
'vabits_actual' may not exist when the next person comes to read this documentation (its
going to rot really quickly).
I think the first half of this text is enough to say what this is for. You should include
words to the effect that its the hardware value that goes with swapper_pg_dir. You may
want to point readers to the arm-arm for more details on what the value means.
Thanks,
James
Hi James,
On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Bhupesh,
I am sorry this review mail skipped my attention due to holidays and
focus on other urgent issues.
> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>> Add documentation for TCR_EL1.T1SZ variable being added to
>> vmcoreinfo.
>>
>> It indicates the size offset of the memory region addressed by TTBR1_EL1
>
>> and hence can be used for determining the vabits_actual value.
>
> used for determining random-internal-kernel-variable, that might not exist tomorrow.
>
> Could you describe how this is useful/necessary if a debugger wants to walk the page
> tables from the core file? I think this is a better argument.
>
> Wouldn't the documentation be better as part of the patch that adds the export?
> (... unless these have to go via different trees? ..)
Ok, will fix the same in v6 version.
>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
>> index 447b64314f56..f9349f9d3345 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
>> @@ -398,6 +398,12 @@ KERNELOFFSET
>> The kernel randomization offset. Used to compute the page offset. If
>> KASLR is disabled, this value is zero.
>>
>> +TCR_EL1.T1SZ
>> +------------
>> +
>> +Indicates the size offset of the memory region addressed by TTBR1_EL1
>
>> +and hence can be used for determining the vabits_actual value.
>
> 'vabits_actual' may not exist when the next person comes to read this documentation (its
> going to rot really quickly).
>
> I think the first half of this text is enough to say what this is for. You should include
> words to the effect that its the hardware value that goes with swapper_pg_dir. You may
> want to point readers to the arm-arm for more details on what the value means.
Ok, got it. Fixed this in v6, which should be on its way shortly.
Thanks,
Bhupesh
Hi James,
On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
> Hi Bhupesh,
>
> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
>> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
>> spaces.
>>
>> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
>> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of address
>> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
>> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to 48-bit
>> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
>>
>> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
>> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
>> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
>> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
>> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the architectural
>> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate intended
>> specific fields to user-space.
>>
>> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
>> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
>
> (write?)
Yes, also write so that the vmcoreinfo from an (crashing) arm64 system
can be used for analysis of the root-cause of panic/crash on say an
x86_64 host using utilities like crash-utility/gdb.
>> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
>
> I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to know this.
Well that the current user-space utility design, so I am not sure we can
tweak that too much.
>> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies in
>> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
>>
>> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) & BIT(vabits_actual - 1)))
>
> This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA space"). If user-space
> tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to constantly be fixed
> and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something that ends up as ABI.
See above. The user-space has to rely on some ABI/guaranteed
hardware-symbols which can be used for 'determining' the kernel memory
layout.
> I think a better argument is walking the kernel page tables from the core dump.
> Core code's vmcoreinfo exports the location of the kernel page tables, but in the example
> above you can't walk them without knowing how T1SZ was configured.
Sure, both makedumpfile and crash-utility (which walks the kernel page
tables from the core dump) use this (and similar) information currently
in the user-space.
> On older kernels, user-space that needs this would have to assume the value it computes
> from VA_BITs (also in vmcoreinfo) is the value in use.
Yes, backward compatibility has been handled in the user-space already.
> ---%<---
>> I have sent out user-space patches for makedumpfile and crash-utility
>> to add features for obtaining vabits_actual value from TCR_EL1.T1SZ (see
>> [0] and [1]).
>>
>> Akashi reported that he was able to use this patchset and the user-space
>> changes to get user-space working fine with the 52-bit kernel VA
>> changes (see [2]).
>>
>> [0]. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/023966.html
>> [1]. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/024006.html
>> [2]. http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/023992.html
> ---%<---
>
> This probably belongs in the cover letter instead of the commit log.
Ok.
> (From-memory: one of vmcore/kcore is virtually addressed, the other physically. Does this
> fix your poblem in both cases?)
>
>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
>> index ca4c3e12d8c5..f78310ba65ea 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
>> @@ -7,6 +7,13 @@
>> #include <linux/crash_core.h>
>> #include <asm/memory.h>
>
> You need to include asm/sysreg.h for read_sysreg(), and asm/pgtable-hwdef.h for the macros
> you added.
Ok. Will check as I did not get any compilation errors without the same
and build-bot also did not raise a flag for the missing include files.
>> +static inline u64 get_tcr_el1_t1sz(void);
> Why do you need to do this?
Without this I was getting a missing declaration error, while compiling
the code.
>> +static inline u64 get_tcr_el1_t1sz(void)
>> +{
>> + return (read_sysreg(tcr_el1) & TCR_T1SZ_MASK) >> TCR_T1SZ_OFFSET;
>> +}
>
> (We don't modify this one, and its always the same one very CPU, so this is fine.
> This function is only called once when the stringy vmcoreinfo elf_note is created...)
Right.
>> void arch_crash_save_vmcoreinfo(void)
>> {
>> VMCOREINFO_NUMBER(VA_BITS);
>> @@ -15,5 +22,7 @@ void arch_crash_save_vmcoreinfo(void)
>> kimage_voffset);
>> vmcoreinfo_append_str("NUMBER(PHYS_OFFSET)=0x%llx\n",
>> PHYS_OFFSET);
>> + vmcoreinfo_append_str("NUMBER(tcr_el1_t1sz)=0x%llx\n",
>> + get_tcr_el1_t1sz());
>
> You document the name as being upper-case.
> The two values either values either side are upper-case.
Ok, will fix this in v6. Thanks for your inputs.
>> vmcoreinfo_append_str("KERNELOFFSET=%lx\n", kaslr_offset());
>> }
Thanks,
Bhupesh
Hi Bhupesh,
On 25/12/2019 19:01, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
>> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
>>> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
>>> spaces.
>>>
>>> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
>>> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of address
>>> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
>>> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to 48-bit
>>> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
>>>
>>> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
>>> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
>>> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
>>> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
>>> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the architectural
>>> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate intended
>>> specific fields to user-space.
>>>
>>> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
>>> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
>>
>> (write?)
>
> Yes, also write so that the vmcoreinfo from an (crashing) arm64 system can be used for
> analysis of the root-cause of panic/crash on say an x86_64 host using utilities like
> crash-utility/gdb.
I read this as as "User-space [...] needs to write to vmcoreinfo".
>>> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
>>
>> I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to know this.
>
> Well that the current user-space utility design, so I am not sure we can tweak that too much.
>
>>> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies in
>>> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
>>>
>>> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) & BIT(vabits_actual - 1)))
>>
>> This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA space"). If user-space
>> tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to constantly be fixed
>> and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something that ends up as ABI.
>
> See above. The user-space has to rely on some ABI/guaranteed hardware-symbols which can be
> used for 'determining' the kernel memory layout.
I disagree. Everything and anything in the kernel will change. The ABI rules apply to
stuff exposed via syscalls and kernel filesystems. It does not apply to kernel internals,
like the memory layout we used yesterday. 14c127c957c1 is a case in point.
A debugger trying to rely on this sort of thing would have to play catchup whenever it
changes.
I'm looking for a justification that isn't paper-thin. Putting 'for guessing the memory
map' in the commit message gives the impression we can support that.
>> I think a better argument is walking the kernel page tables from the core dump.
>> Core code's vmcoreinfo exports the location of the kernel page tables, but in the example
>> above you can't walk them without knowing how T1SZ was configured.
>
> Sure, both makedumpfile and crash-utility (which walks the kernel page tables from the
> core dump) use this (and similar) information currently in the user-space.
[...]
>> (From-memory: one of vmcore/kcore is virtually addressed, the other physically. Does this
>> fix your poblem in both cases?)
>>
>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
>>> index ca4c3e12d8c5..f78310ba65ea 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/crash_core.c
>>> @@ -7,6 +7,13 @@
>>> #include <linux/crash_core.h>
>>> #include <asm/memory.h>
>>
>> You need to include asm/sysreg.h for read_sysreg(), and asm/pgtable-hwdef.h for the macros
>> you added.
>
> Ok. Will check as I did not get any compilation errors without the same and build-bot also
> did not raise a flag for the missing include files.
Don't trust the header jungle!
>>> +static inline u64 get_tcr_el1_t1sz(void);
>
>> Why do you need to do this?
>
> Without this I was getting a missing declaration error, while compiling the code.
Missing declaration?
>>> +static inline u64 get_tcr_el1_t1sz(void)
>>> +{
>>> + return (read_sysreg(tcr_el1) & TCR_T1SZ_MASK) >> TCR_T1SZ_OFFSET;
>>> +}
Here it is! (I must be going mad...)
Thanks,
James
----- Original Message -----
> Hi Bhupesh,
>
> On 25/12/2019 19:01, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> > On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
> >> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> >>> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
> >>> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
> >>> spaces.
> >>>
> >>> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
> >>> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of address
> >>> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
> >>> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to 48-bit
> >>> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
> >>>
> >>> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
> >>> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
> >>> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
> >>> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
> >>> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the architectural
> >>> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate intended
> >>> specific fields to user-space.
> >>>
> >>> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
> >>> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
> >>
> >> (write?)
> >
> > Yes, also write so that the vmcoreinfo from an (crashing) arm64 system can
> > be used for
> > analysis of the root-cause of panic/crash on say an x86_64 host using
> > utilities like
> > crash-utility/gdb.
>
> I read this as as "User-space [...] needs to write to vmcoreinfo".
>
>
> >>> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
> >>
> >> I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to know
> >> this.
> >
> > Well that the current user-space utility design, so I am not sure we can
> > tweak that too much.
> >
> >>> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies in
> >>> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
> >>>
> >>> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) & BIT(vabits_actual -
> >>> 1)))
> >>
> >> This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA space"). If
> >> user-space
> >> tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to
> >> constantly be fixed
> >> and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something that
> >> ends up as ABI.
> >
> > See above. The user-space has to rely on some ABI/guaranteed
> > hardware-symbols which can be
> > used for 'determining' the kernel memory layout.
>
> I disagree. Everything and anything in the kernel will change. The ABI rules apply to
> stuff exposed via syscalls and kernel filesystems. It does not apply to kernel internals,
> like the memory layout we used yesterday. 14c127c957c1 is a case in point.
>
> A debugger trying to rely on this sort of thing would have to play catchup whenever it
> changes.
Exactly. That's the whole point.
The crash utility and makedumpfile are not in the same league as other user-space tools.
They have always had to "play catchup" precisely because they depend upon kernel internals,
which constantly change.
Dave
Hi James,
On 01/11/2020 12:30 AM, Dave Anderson wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Hi Bhupesh,
>>
>> On 25/12/2019 19:01, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>> On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
>>>> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>>>> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
>>>>> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
>>>>> spaces.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
>>>>> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of address
>>>>> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
>>>>> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to 48-bit
>>>>> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
>>>>> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
>>>>> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
>>>>> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
>>>>> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the architectural
>>>>> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate intended
>>>>> specific fields to user-space.
>>>>>
>>>>> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
>>>>> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
>>>>
>>>> (write?)
>>>
>>> Yes, also write so that the vmcoreinfo from an (crashing) arm64 system can
>>> be used for
>>> analysis of the root-cause of panic/crash on say an x86_64 host using
>>> utilities like
>>> crash-utility/gdb.
>>
>> I read this as as "User-space [...] needs to write to vmcoreinfo".
That's correct. But for writing to vmcore dump in the kdump kernel, we
need to read the symbols from the vmcoreinfo in the primary kernel.
>>>>> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
>>>>
>>>> I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to know
>>>> this.
>>>
>>> Well that the current user-space utility design, so I am not sure we can
>>> tweak that too much.
>>>
>>>>> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies in
>>>>> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
>>>>>
>>>>> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) & BIT(vabits_actual -
>>>>> 1)))
>>>>
>>>> This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA space"). If
>>>> user-space
>>>> tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to
>>>> constantly be fixed
>>>> and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something that
>>>> ends up as ABI.
>>>
>>> See above. The user-space has to rely on some ABI/guaranteed
>>> hardware-symbols which can be
>>> used for 'determining' the kernel memory layout.
>>
>> I disagree. Everything and anything in the kernel will change. The ABI rules apply to
>> stuff exposed via syscalls and kernel filesystems. It does not apply to kernel internals,
>> like the memory layout we used yesterday. 14c127c957c1 is a case in point.
>>
>> A debugger trying to rely on this sort of thing would have to play catchup whenever it
>> changes.
>
> Exactly. That's the whole point.
>
> The crash utility and makedumpfile are not in the same league as other user-space tools.
> They have always had to "play catchup" precisely because they depend upon kernel internals,
> which constantly change.
I agree with you and DaveA here. Software user-space debuggers are
dependent on kernel internals (which can change from time-to-time) and
will have to play catch-up (which has been the case since the very start).
Unfortunately we don't have any clear ABI for software debugging tools -
may be something to look for in future.
A case in point is gdb/kgdb, which still needs to run with KASLR
turned-off (nokaslr) for debugging, as it confuses gdb which resolve
kernel symbol address from symbol table of vmlinux. But we can
work-around the same in makedumpfile/crash by reading the 'kaslr_offset'
value. And I have several users telling me now they cannot use gdb on
KASLR enabled kernel to debug panics, but can makedumpfile + crash
combination to achieve the same.
So, we should be looking to fix these utilities which are broken since
the 52-bit changes for arm64. Accordingly, I will try to send the v6
soon while incorporating the comments posted on the v5.
Thanks,
Bhupesh
Hi Bhupesh,
On 1/13/20 5:44 PM, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> On 01/11/2020 12:30 AM, Dave Anderson wrote:
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> Hi Bhupesh,
>>>
>>> On 25/12/2019 19:01, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>>> On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
>>>>> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>>>>> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
>>>>>> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
>>>>>> spaces.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
>>>>>> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of address
>>>>>> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
>>>>>> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to 48-bit
>>>>>> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
>>>>>> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
>>>>>> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
>>>>>> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
>>>>>> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the architectural
>>>>>> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate intended
>>>>>> specific fields to user-space.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
>>>>>> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
>>>>>
>>>>> (write?)
>>>>
>>>> Yes, also write so that the vmcoreinfo from an (crashing) arm64
>>>> system can
>>>> be used for
>>>> analysis of the root-cause of panic/crash on say an x86_64 host using
>>>> utilities like
>>>> crash-utility/gdb.
>>>
>>> I read this as as "User-space [...] needs to write to vmcoreinfo".
>
> That's correct. But for writing to vmcore dump in the kdump kernel, we
> need to read the symbols from the vmcoreinfo in the primary kernel.
>
>>>>>> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to know
>>>>> this.
>>>>
>>>> Well that the current user-space utility design, so I am not sure we
>>>> can
>>>> tweak that too much.
>>>>
>>>>>> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies in
>>>>>> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) &
>>>>>> BIT(vabits_actual -
>>>>>> 1)))
>>>>>
>>>>> This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA
>>>>> space"). If
>>>>> user-space
>>>>> tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to
>>>>> constantly be fixed
>>>>> and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something that
>>>>> ends up as ABI.
>>>>
>>>> See above. The user-space has to rely on some ABI/guaranteed
>>>> hardware-symbols which can be
>>>> used for 'determining' the kernel memory layout.
>>>
>>> I disagree. Everything and anything in the kernel will change. The
>>> ABI rules apply to
>>> stuff exposed via syscalls and kernel filesystems. It does not apply
>>> to kernel internals,
>>> like the memory layout we used yesterday. 14c127c957c1 is a case in
>>> point.
>>>
>>> A debugger trying to rely on this sort of thing would have to play
>>> catchup whenever it
>>> changes.
>>
>> Exactly. That's the whole point.
>>
>> The crash utility and makedumpfile are not in the same league as other
>> user-space tools.
>> They have always had to "play catchup" precisely because they depend
>> upon kernel internals,
>> which constantly change.
>
> I agree with you and DaveA here. Software user-space debuggers are
> dependent on kernel internals (which can change from time-to-time) and
> will have to play catch-up (which has been the case since the very start).
>
> Unfortunately we don't have any clear ABI for software debugging tools -
> may be something to look for in future.
>
> A case in point is gdb/kgdb, which still needs to run with KASLR
> turned-off (nokaslr) for debugging, as it confuses gdb which resolve
> kernel symbol address from symbol table of vmlinux. But we can
> work-around the same in makedumpfile/crash by reading the 'kaslr_offset'
> value. And I have several users telling me now they cannot use gdb on
> KASLR enabled kernel to debug panics, but can makedumpfile + crash
> combination to achieve the same.
>
> So, we should be looking to fix these utilities which are broken since
> the 52-bit changes for arm64. Accordingly, I will try to send the v6
> soon while incorporating the comments posted on the v5.
Any update on the next v6 version. Since this patch series is fixing the
current broken kdump so need this series to add some more fields in
vmcoreinfo for Pointer Authentication work.
Thanks,
Amit Daniel
>
> Thanks,
> Bhupesh
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Hi Amit,
On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 2:36 PM Amit Kachhap <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Bhupesh,
>
> On 1/13/20 5:44 PM, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> > Hi James,
> >
> > On 01/11/2020 12:30 AM, Dave Anderson wrote:
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> Hi Bhupesh,
> >>>
> >>> On 25/12/2019 19:01, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> >>>> On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
> >>>>> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> >>>>>> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
> >>>>>> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
> >>>>>> spaces.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
> >>>>>> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of address
> >>>>>> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
> >>>>>> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to 48-bit
> >>>>>> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
> >>>>>> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
> >>>>>> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
> >>>>>> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
> >>>>>> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the architectural
> >>>>>> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate intended
> >>>>>> specific fields to user-space.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
> >>>>>> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
> >>>>>
> >>>>> (write?)
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes, also write so that the vmcoreinfo from an (crashing) arm64
> >>>> system can
> >>>> be used for
> >>>> analysis of the root-cause of panic/crash on say an x86_64 host using
> >>>> utilities like
> >>>> crash-utility/gdb.
> >>>
> >>> I read this as as "User-space [...] needs to write to vmcoreinfo".
> >
> > That's correct. But for writing to vmcore dump in the kdump kernel, we
> > need to read the symbols from the vmcoreinfo in the primary kernel.
> >
> >>>>>> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to know
> >>>>> this.
> >>>>
> >>>> Well that the current user-space utility design, so I am not sure we
> >>>> can
> >>>> tweak that too much.
> >>>>
> >>>>>> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies in
> >>>>>> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) &
> >>>>>> BIT(vabits_actual -
> >>>>>> 1)))
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA
> >>>>> space"). If
> >>>>> user-space
> >>>>> tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to
> >>>>> constantly be fixed
> >>>>> and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something that
> >>>>> ends up as ABI.
> >>>>
> >>>> See above. The user-space has to rely on some ABI/guaranteed
> >>>> hardware-symbols which can be
> >>>> used for 'determining' the kernel memory layout.
> >>>
> >>> I disagree. Everything and anything in the kernel will change. The
> >>> ABI rules apply to
> >>> stuff exposed via syscalls and kernel filesystems. It does not apply
> >>> to kernel internals,
> >>> like the memory layout we used yesterday. 14c127c957c1 is a case in
> >>> point.
> >>>
> >>> A debugger trying to rely on this sort of thing would have to play
> >>> catchup whenever it
> >>> changes.
> >>
> >> Exactly. That's the whole point.
> >>
> >> The crash utility and makedumpfile are not in the same league as other
> >> user-space tools.
> >> They have always had to "play catchup" precisely because they depend
> >> upon kernel internals,
> >> which constantly change.
> >
> > I agree with you and DaveA here. Software user-space debuggers are
> > dependent on kernel internals (which can change from time-to-time) and
> > will have to play catch-up (which has been the case since the very start).
> >
> > Unfortunately we don't have any clear ABI for software debugging tools -
> > may be something to look for in future.
> >
> > A case in point is gdb/kgdb, which still needs to run with KASLR
> > turned-off (nokaslr) for debugging, as it confuses gdb which resolve
> > kernel symbol address from symbol table of vmlinux. But we can
> > work-around the same in makedumpfile/crash by reading the 'kaslr_offset'
> > value. And I have several users telling me now they cannot use gdb on
> > KASLR enabled kernel to debug panics, but can makedumpfile + crash
> > combination to achieve the same.
> >
> > So, we should be looking to fix these utilities which are broken since
> > the 52-bit changes for arm64. Accordingly, I will try to send the v6
> > soon while incorporating the comments posted on the v5.
>
> Any update on the next v6 version. Since this patch series is fixing the
> current broken kdump so need this series to add some more fields in
> vmcoreinfo for Pointer Authentication work.
Sorry for the delay. I was caught up in some other urgent arm64
user-space issues.
I am preparing the v6 now and hopefully will be able to post it out
for review later today.
Thanks,
Bhupesh
Hi Bhupesh,
On 2020-02-23 10:25 p.m., Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Hi Amit,
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 2:36 PM Amit Kachhap <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Bhupesh,
>>
>> On 1/13/20 5:44 PM, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>> Hi James,
>>>
>>> On 01/11/2020 12:30 AM, Dave Anderson wrote:
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> Hi Bhupesh,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 25/12/2019 19:01, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
>>>>>>> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>>>>>>> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
>>>>>>>> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
>>>>>>>> spaces.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
>>>>>>>> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of address
>>>>>>>> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
>>>>>>>> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to 48-bit
>>>>>>>> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
>>>>>>>> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
>>>>>>>> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
>>>>>>>> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
>>>>>>>> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the architectural
>>>>>>>> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate intended
>>>>>>>> specific fields to user-space.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
>>>>>>>> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
>>>>>>> (write?)
>>>>>> Yes, also write so that the vmcoreinfo from an (crashing) arm64
>>>>>> system can
>>>>>> be used for
>>>>>> analysis of the root-cause of panic/crash on say an x86_64 host using
>>>>>> utilities like
>>>>>> crash-utility/gdb.
>>>>> I read this as as "User-space [...] needs to write to vmcoreinfo".
>>> That's correct. But for writing to vmcore dump in the kdump kernel, we
>>> need to read the symbols from the vmcoreinfo in the primary kernel.
>>>
>>>>>>>> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
>>>>>>> I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to know
>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>> Well that the current user-space utility design, so I am not sure we
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> tweak that too much.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies in
>>>>>>>> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) &
>>>>>>>> BIT(vabits_actual -
>>>>>>>> 1)))
>>>>>>> This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA
>>>>>>> space"). If
>>>>>>> user-space
>>>>>>> tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to
>>>>>>> constantly be fixed
>>>>>>> and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something that
>>>>>>> ends up as ABI.
>>>>>> See above. The user-space has to rely on some ABI/guaranteed
>>>>>> hardware-symbols which can be
>>>>>> used for 'determining' the kernel memory layout.
>>>>> I disagree. Everything and anything in the kernel will change. The
>>>>> ABI rules apply to
>>>>> stuff exposed via syscalls and kernel filesystems. It does not apply
>>>>> to kernel internals,
>>>>> like the memory layout we used yesterday. 14c127c957c1 is a case in
>>>>> point.
>>>>>
>>>>> A debugger trying to rely on this sort of thing would have to play
>>>>> catchup whenever it
>>>>> changes.
>>>> Exactly. That's the whole point.
>>>>
>>>> The crash utility and makedumpfile are not in the same league as other
>>>> user-space tools.
>>>> They have always had to "play catchup" precisely because they depend
>>>> upon kernel internals,
>>>> which constantly change.
>>> I agree with you and DaveA here. Software user-space debuggers are
>>> dependent on kernel internals (which can change from time-to-time) and
>>> will have to play catch-up (which has been the case since the very start).
>>>
>>> Unfortunately we don't have any clear ABI for software debugging tools -
>>> may be something to look for in future.
>>>
>>> A case in point is gdb/kgdb, which still needs to run with KASLR
>>> turned-off (nokaslr) for debugging, as it confuses gdb which resolve
>>> kernel symbol address from symbol table of vmlinux. But we can
>>> work-around the same in makedumpfile/crash by reading the 'kaslr_offset'
>>> value. And I have several users telling me now they cannot use gdb on
>>> KASLR enabled kernel to debug panics, but can makedumpfile + crash
>>> combination to achieve the same.
>>>
>>> So, we should be looking to fix these utilities which are broken since
>>> the 52-bit changes for arm64. Accordingly, I will try to send the v6
>>> soon while incorporating the comments posted on the v5.
>> Any update on the next v6 version. Since this patch series is fixing the
>> current broken kdump so need this series to add some more fields in
>> vmcoreinfo for Pointer Authentication work.
> Sorry for the delay. I was caught up in some other urgent arm64
> user-space issues.
> I am preparing the v6 now and hopefully will be able to post it out
> for review later today.
Did v6 get sent out?
>
> Thanks,
> Bhupesh
>
>
Regards,
Scott
Hi Bhupesh,
Would be great to get this patch series upstreamed?
On 2019-12-25 10:49 a.m., Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
>> Hi Bhupesh,
>
> I am sorry this review mail skipped my attention due to holidays and
> focus on other urgent issues.
>
>> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>> Add documentation for TCR_EL1.T1SZ variable being added to
>>> vmcoreinfo.
>>>
>>> It indicates the size offset of the memory region addressed by
>>> TTBR1_EL1
>>
>>> and hence can be used for determining the vabits_actual value.
>>
>> used for determining random-internal-kernel-variable, that might not
>> exist tomorrow.
>>
>> Could you describe how this is useful/necessary if a debugger wants
>> to walk the page
>> tables from the core file? I think this is a better argument.
>>
>> Wouldn't the documentation be better as part of the patch that adds
>> the export?
>> (... unless these have to go via different trees? ..)
>
> Ok, will fix the same in v6 version.
>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
>>> b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
>>> index 447b64314f56..f9349f9d3345 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
>>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
>>> @@ -398,6 +398,12 @@ KERNELOFFSET
>>> The kernel randomization offset. Used to compute the page offset. If
>>> KASLR is disabled, this value is zero.
>>> +TCR_EL1.T1SZ
>>> +------------
>>> +
>>> +Indicates the size offset of the memory region addressed by TTBR1_EL1
>>
>>> +and hence can be used for determining the vabits_actual value.
>>
>> 'vabits_actual' may not exist when the next person comes to read this
>> documentation (its
>> going to rot really quickly).
>>
>> I think the first half of this text is enough to say what this is
>> for. You should include
>> words to the effect that its the hardware value that goes with
>> swapper_pg_dir. You may
>> want to point readers to the arm-arm for more details on what the
>> value means.
>
> Ok, got it. Fixed this in v6, which should be on its way shortly.
I can't seem to find v6?
>
> Thanks,
> Bhupesh
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>
Hello Scott,
On Thu, Jun 4, 2020 at 12:17 AM Scott Branden
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hi Bhupesh,
>
> Would be great to get this patch series upstreamed?
>
> On 2019-12-25 10:49 a.m., Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> > Hi James,
> >
> > On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
> >> Hi Bhupesh,
> >
> > I am sorry this review mail skipped my attention due to holidays and
> > focus on other urgent issues.
> >
> >> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> >>> Add documentation for TCR_EL1.T1SZ variable being added to
> >>> vmcoreinfo.
> >>>
> >>> It indicates the size offset of the memory region addressed by
> >>> TTBR1_EL1
> >>
> >>> and hence can be used for determining the vabits_actual value.
> >>
> >> used for determining random-internal-kernel-variable, that might not
> >> exist tomorrow.
> >>
> >> Could you describe how this is useful/necessary if a debugger wants
> >> to walk the page
> >> tables from the core file? I think this is a better argument.
> >>
> >> Wouldn't the documentation be better as part of the patch that adds
> >> the export?
> >> (... unless these have to go via different trees? ..)
> >
> > Ok, will fix the same in v6 version.
> >
> >>> diff --git a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
> >>> b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
> >>> index 447b64314f56..f9349f9d3345 100644
> >>> --- a/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
> >>> +++ b/Documentation/admin-guide/kdump/vmcoreinfo.rst
> >>> @@ -398,6 +398,12 @@ KERNELOFFSET
> >>> The kernel randomization offset. Used to compute the page offset. If
> >>> KASLR is disabled, this value is zero.
> >>> +TCR_EL1.T1SZ
> >>> +------------
> >>> +
> >>> +Indicates the size offset of the memory region addressed by TTBR1_EL1
> >>
> >>> +and hence can be used for determining the vabits_actual value.
> >>
> >> 'vabits_actual' may not exist when the next person comes to read this
> >> documentation (its
> >> going to rot really quickly).
> >>
> >> I think the first half of this text is enough to say what this is
> >> for. You should include
> >> words to the effect that its the hardware value that goes with
> >> swapper_pg_dir. You may
> >> want to point readers to the arm-arm for more details on what the
> >> value means.
> >
> > Ok, got it. Fixed this in v6, which should be on its way shortly.
> I can't seem to find v6?
Oops. I remember Cc'ing you to the v6 patchset (may be my email client
messed up), anyways here is the v6 patchset for your reference:
<http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2020-May/025095.html>
Do share your review/test comments on the same.
Thanks,
Bhupesh
Hello Bhupesh,
V6 patch set on Linux 5.7, did not help.
I have applied makedump file
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/023963.html changes
also (makedump-1.6.6). Tried to apply it on makedumpfile 1.6.7. Patch set_2
failed. Would like to know, if you have V5 patch set for makedump file
changes. With makedump 1.6.6, able to collect the vmore file.
I used latest crash utility
(https://www.redhat.com/archives/crash-utility/2019-November/msg00014.html
changes are present)
When I used crash utility, following is the error:
Thanks,
-Bharat
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Branden [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 4:34 AM
To: Bhupesh Sharma; Amit Kachhap
Cc: Mark Rutland; [email protected]; Will Deacon; Linux Doc Mailing List;
Catalin Marinas; Ard Biesheuvel; kexec mailing list; Linux Kernel Mailing
List; Kazuhito Hagio; James Morse; Dave Anderson; bhupesh linux;
[email protected]; linux-arm-kernel; Steve Capper; Ray Jui;
Bharat Gooty
Subject: Re: Re: [RESEND PATCH v5 2/5] arm64/crash_core: Export TCR_EL1.T1SZ
in vmcoreinfo
Hi Bhupesh,
On 2020-02-23 10:25 p.m., Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Hi Amit,
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 2:36 PM Amit Kachhap <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Bhupesh,
>>
>> On 1/13/20 5:44 PM, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>> Hi James,
>>>
>>> On 01/11/2020 12:30 AM, Dave Anderson wrote:
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> Hi Bhupesh,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 25/12/2019 19:01, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
>>>>>>> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>>>>>>> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
>>>>>>>> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
>>>>>>>> spaces.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
>>>>>>>> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of
>>>>>>>> address
>>>>>>>> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
>>>>>>>> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to
>>>>>>>> 48-bit
>>>>>>>> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
>>>>>>>> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
>>>>>>>> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
>>>>>>>> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
>>>>>>>> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the
>>>>>>>> architectural
>>>>>>>> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate
>>>>>>>> intended
>>>>>>>> specific fields to user-space.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
>>>>>>>> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
>>>>>>> (write?)
>>>>>> Yes, also write so that the vmcoreinfo from an (crashing) arm64
>>>>>> system can
>>>>>> be used for
>>>>>> analysis of the root-cause of panic/crash on say an x86_64 host using
>>>>>> utilities like
>>>>>> crash-utility/gdb.
>>>>> I read this as as "User-space [...] needs to write to vmcoreinfo".
>>> That's correct. But for writing to vmcore dump in the kdump kernel, we
>>> need to read the symbols from the vmcoreinfo in the primary kernel.
>>>
>>>>>>>> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
>>>>>>> I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to
>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>> Well that the current user-space utility design, so I am not sure we
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> tweak that too much.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) &
>>>>>>>> BIT(vabits_actual -
>>>>>>>> 1)))
>>>>>>> This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA
>>>>>>> space"). If
>>>>>>> user-space
>>>>>>> tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to
>>>>>>> constantly be fixed
>>>>>>> and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> ends up as ABI.
>>>>>> See above. The user-space has to rely on some ABI/guaranteed
>>>>>> hardware-symbols which can be
>>>>>> used for 'determining' the kernel memory layout.
>>>>> I disagree. Everything and anything in the kernel will change. The
>>>>> ABI rules apply to
>>>>> stuff exposed via syscalls and kernel filesystems. It does not apply
>>>>> to kernel internals,
>>>>> like the memory layout we used yesterday. 14c127c957c1 is a case in
>>>>> point.
>>>>>
>>>>> A debugger trying to rely on this sort of thing would have to play
>>>>> catchup whenever it
>>>>> changes.
>>>> Exactly. That's the whole point.
>>>>
>>>> The crash utility and makedumpfile are not in the same league as other
>>>> user-space tools.
>>>> They have always had to "play catchup" precisely because they depend
>>>> upon kernel internals,
>>>> which constantly change.
>>> I agree with you and DaveA here. Software user-space debuggers are
>>> dependent on kernel internals (which can change from time-to-time) and
>>> will have to play catch-up (which has been the case since the very
>>> start).
>>>
>>> Unfortunately we don't have any clear ABI for software debugging tools -
>>> may be something to look for in future.
>>>
>>> A case in point is gdb/kgdb, which still needs to run with KASLR
>>> turned-off (nokaslr) for debugging, as it confuses gdb which resolve
>>> kernel symbol address from symbol table of vmlinux. But we can
>>> work-around the same in makedumpfile/crash by reading the 'kaslr_offset'
>>> value. And I have several users telling me now they cannot use gdb on
>>> KASLR enabled kernel to debug panics, but can makedumpfile + crash
>>> combination to achieve the same.
>>>
>>> So, we should be looking to fix these utilities which are broken since
>>> the 52-bit changes for arm64. Accordingly, I will try to send the v6
>>> soon while incorporating the comments posted on the v5.
>> Any update on the next v6 version. Since this patch series is fixing the
>> current broken kdump so need this series to add some more fields in
>> vmcoreinfo for Pointer Authentication work.
> Sorry for the delay. I was caught up in some other urgent arm64
> user-space issues.
> I am preparing the v6 now and hopefully will be able to post it out
> for review later today.
Did v6 get sent out?
>
> Thanks,
> Bhupesh
>
>
Regards,
Scott
Sorry, error message was not posted. Following is the error message
crash: cannot determine VA_BITS_ACTUAL
-----Original Message-----
From: Bharat Gooty [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 10:18 PM
To: Scott Branden; 'Bhupesh Sharma'; 'Amit Kachhap'
Cc: 'Mark Rutland'; '[email protected]'; 'Will Deacon'; 'Linux Doc Mailing
List'; 'Catalin Marinas'; 'Ard Biesheuvel'; 'kexec mailing list'; 'Linux
Kernel Mailing List'; 'Kazuhito Hagio'; 'James Morse'; 'Dave Anderson';
'bhupesh linux'; '[email protected]'; 'linux-arm-kernel'; 'Steve
Capper'; Ray Jui
Subject: RE: Re: [RESEND PATCH v5 2/5] arm64/crash_core: Export TCR_EL1.T1SZ
in vmcoreinfo
Hello Bhupesh,
V6 patch set on Linux 5.7, did not help.
I have applied makedump file
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/023963.html changes
also (makedump-1.6.6). Tried to apply it on makedumpfile 1.6.7. Patch set_2
failed. Would like to know, if you have V5 patch set for makedump file
changes. With makedump 1.6.6, able to collect the vmore file.
I used latest crash utility
(https://www.redhat.com/archives/crash-utility/2019-November/msg00014.html
changes are present)
When I used crash utility, following is the error:
Thanks,
-Bharat
-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Branden [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 4:34 AM
To: Bhupesh Sharma; Amit Kachhap
Cc: Mark Rutland; [email protected]; Will Deacon; Linux Doc Mailing List;
Catalin Marinas; Ard Biesheuvel; kexec mailing list; Linux Kernel Mailing
List; Kazuhito Hagio; James Morse; Dave Anderson; bhupesh linux;
[email protected]; linux-arm-kernel; Steve Capper; Ray Jui;
Bharat Gooty
Subject: Re: Re: [RESEND PATCH v5 2/5] arm64/crash_core: Export TCR_EL1.T1SZ
in vmcoreinfo
Hi Bhupesh,
On 2020-02-23 10:25 p.m., Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> Hi Amit,
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 2:36 PM Amit Kachhap <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Bhupesh,
>>
>> On 1/13/20 5:44 PM, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>> Hi James,
>>>
>>> On 01/11/2020 12:30 AM, Dave Anderson wrote:
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> Hi Bhupesh,
>>>>>
>>>>> On 25/12/2019 19:01, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>>>>> On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
>>>>>>> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
>>>>>>>> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
>>>>>>>> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
>>>>>>>> spaces.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
>>>>>>>> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of
>>>>>>>> address
>>>>>>>> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
>>>>>>>> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to
>>>>>>>> 48-bit
>>>>>>>> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
>>>>>>>> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
>>>>>>>> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
>>>>>>>> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
>>>>>>>> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the
>>>>>>>> architectural
>>>>>>>> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate
>>>>>>>> intended
>>>>>>>> specific fields to user-space.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
>>>>>>>> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
>>>>>>> (write?)
>>>>>> Yes, also write so that the vmcoreinfo from an (crashing) arm64
>>>>>> system can
>>>>>> be used for
>>>>>> analysis of the root-cause of panic/crash on say an x86_64 host using
>>>>>> utilities like
>>>>>> crash-utility/gdb.
>>>>> I read this as as "User-space [...] needs to write to vmcoreinfo".
>>> That's correct. But for writing to vmcore dump in the kdump kernel, we
>>> need to read the symbols from the vmcoreinfo in the primary kernel.
>>>
>>>>>>>> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
>>>>>>> I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to
>>>>>>> know
>>>>>>> this.
>>>>>> Well that the current user-space utility design, so I am not sure we
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> tweak that too much.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies
>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) &
>>>>>>>> BIT(vabits_actual -
>>>>>>>> 1)))
>>>>>>> This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA
>>>>>>> space"). If
>>>>>>> user-space
>>>>>>> tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to
>>>>>>> constantly be fixed
>>>>>>> and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something
>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>> ends up as ABI.
>>>>>> See above. The user-space has to rely on some ABI/guaranteed
>>>>>> hardware-symbols which can be
>>>>>> used for 'determining' the kernel memory layout.
>>>>> I disagree. Everything and anything in the kernel will change. The
>>>>> ABI rules apply to
>>>>> stuff exposed via syscalls and kernel filesystems. It does not apply
>>>>> to kernel internals,
>>>>> like the memory layout we used yesterday. 14c127c957c1 is a case in
>>>>> point.
>>>>>
>>>>> A debugger trying to rely on this sort of thing would have to play
>>>>> catchup whenever it
>>>>> changes.
>>>> Exactly. That's the whole point.
>>>>
>>>> The crash utility and makedumpfile are not in the same league as other
>>>> user-space tools.
>>>> They have always had to "play catchup" precisely because they depend
>>>> upon kernel internals,
>>>> which constantly change.
>>> I agree with you and DaveA here. Software user-space debuggers are
>>> dependent on kernel internals (which can change from time-to-time) and
>>> will have to play catch-up (which has been the case since the very
>>> start).
>>>
>>> Unfortunately we don't have any clear ABI for software debugging tools -
>>> may be something to look for in future.
>>>
>>> A case in point is gdb/kgdb, which still needs to run with KASLR
>>> turned-off (nokaslr) for debugging, as it confuses gdb which resolve
>>> kernel symbol address from symbol table of vmlinux. But we can
>>> work-around the same in makedumpfile/crash by reading the 'kaslr_offset'
>>> value. And I have several users telling me now they cannot use gdb on
>>> KASLR enabled kernel to debug panics, but can makedumpfile + crash
>>> combination to achieve the same.
>>>
>>> So, we should be looking to fix these utilities which are broken since
>>> the 52-bit changes for arm64. Accordingly, I will try to send the v6
>>> soon while incorporating the comments posted on the v5.
>> Any update on the next v6 version. Since this patch series is fixing the
>> current broken kdump so need this series to add some more fields in
>> vmcoreinfo for Pointer Authentication work.
> Sorry for the delay. I was caught up in some other urgent arm64
> user-space issues.
> I am preparing the v6 now and hopefully will be able to post it out
> for review later today.
Did v6 get sent out?
>
> Thanks,
> Bhupesh
>
>
Regards,
Scott
Hello Bharat,
On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 10:17 PM Bharat Gooty <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hello Bhupesh,
> V6 patch set on Linux 5.7, did not help.
> I have applied makedump file
> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/2019-November/023963.html changes
> also (makedump-1.6.6). Tried to apply it on makedumpfile 1.6.7. Patch set_2
> failed. Would like to know, if you have V5 patch set for makedump file
> changes. With makedump 1.6.6, able to collect the vmore file.
> I used latest crash utility
> (https://www.redhat.com/archives/crash-utility/2019-November/msg00014.html
> changes are present)
> When I used crash utility, following is the error:
>
> Thanks,
> -Bharat
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Branden [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 4:34 AM
> To: Bhupesh Sharma; Amit Kachhap
> Cc: Mark Rutland; [email protected]; Will Deacon; Linux Doc Mailing List;
> Catalin Marinas; Ard Biesheuvel; kexec mailing list; Linux Kernel Mailing
> List; Kazuhito Hagio; James Morse; Dave Anderson; bhupesh linux;
> [email protected]; linux-arm-kernel; Steve Capper; Ray Jui;
> Bharat Gooty
> Subject: Re: Re: [RESEND PATCH v5 2/5] arm64/crash_core: Export TCR_EL1.T1SZ
> in vmcoreinfo
>
> Hi Bhupesh,
>
> On 2020-02-23 10:25 p.m., Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> > Hi Amit,
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 21, 2020 at 2:36 PM Amit Kachhap <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hi Bhupesh,
> >>
> >> On 1/13/20 5:44 PM, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> >>> Hi James,
> >>>
> >>> On 01/11/2020 12:30 AM, Dave Anderson wrote:
> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>>> Hi Bhupesh,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 25/12/2019 19:01, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> >>>>>> On 12/12/2019 04:02 PM, James Morse wrote:
> >>>>>>> On 29/11/2019 19:59, Bhupesh Sharma wrote:
> >>>>>>>> vabits_actual variable on arm64 indicates the actual VA space size,
> >>>>>>>> and allows a single binary to support both 48-bit and 52-bit VA
> >>>>>>>> spaces.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> If the ARMv8.2-LVA optional feature is present, and we are running
> >>>>>>>> with a 64KB page size; then it is possible to use 52-bits of
> >>>>>>>> address
> >>>>>>>> space for both userspace and kernel addresses. However, any kernel
> >>>>>>>> binary that supports 52-bit must also be able to fall back to
> >>>>>>>> 48-bit
> >>>>>>>> at early boot time if the hardware feature is not present.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Since TCR_EL1.T1SZ indicates the size offset of the memory region
> >>>>>>>> addressed by TTBR1_EL1 (and hence can be used for determining the
> >>>>>>>> vabits_actual value) it makes more sense to export the same in
> >>>>>>>> vmcoreinfo rather than vabits_actual variable, as the name of the
> >>>>>>>> variable can change in future kernel versions, but the
> >>>>>>>> architectural
> >>>>>>>> constructs like TCR_EL1.T1SZ can be used better to indicate
> >>>>>>>> intended
> >>>>>>>> specific fields to user-space.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> User-space utilities like makedumpfile and crash-utility, need to
> >>>>>>>> read/write this value from/to vmcoreinfo
> >>>>>>> (write?)
> >>>>>> Yes, also write so that the vmcoreinfo from an (crashing) arm64
> >>>>>> system can
> >>>>>> be used for
> >>>>>> analysis of the root-cause of panic/crash on say an x86_64 host using
> >>>>>> utilities like
> >>>>>> crash-utility/gdb.
> >>>>> I read this as as "User-space [...] needs to write to vmcoreinfo".
> >>> That's correct. But for writing to vmcore dump in the kdump kernel, we
> >>> need to read the symbols from the vmcoreinfo in the primary kernel.
> >>>
> >>>>>>>> for determining if a virtual address lies in the linear map range.
> >>>>>>> I think this is a fragile example. The debugger shouldn't need to
> >>>>>>> know
> >>>>>>> this.
> >>>>>> Well that the current user-space utility design, so I am not sure we
> >>>>>> can
> >>>>>> tweak that too much.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The user-space computation for determining whether an address lies
> >>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>> the linear map range is the same as we have in kernel-space:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> #define __is_lm_address(addr) (!(((u64)addr) &
> >>>>>>>> BIT(vabits_actual -
> >>>>>>>> 1)))
> >>>>>>> This was changed with 14c127c957c1 ("arm64: mm: Flip kernel VA
> >>>>>>> space"). If
> >>>>>>> user-space
> >>>>>>> tools rely on 'knowing' the kernel memory layout, they must have to
> >>>>>>> constantly be fixed
> >>>>>>> and updated. This is a poor argument for adding this to something
> >>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>> ends up as ABI.
> >>>>>> See above. The user-space has to rely on some ABI/guaranteed
> >>>>>> hardware-symbols which can be
> >>>>>> used for 'determining' the kernel memory layout.
> >>>>> I disagree. Everything and anything in the kernel will change. The
> >>>>> ABI rules apply to
> >>>>> stuff exposed via syscalls and kernel filesystems. It does not apply
> >>>>> to kernel internals,
> >>>>> like the memory layout we used yesterday. 14c127c957c1 is a case in
> >>>>> point.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> A debugger trying to rely on this sort of thing would have to play
> >>>>> catchup whenever it
> >>>>> changes.
> >>>> Exactly. That's the whole point.
> >>>>
> >>>> The crash utility and makedumpfile are not in the same league as other
> >>>> user-space tools.
> >>>> They have always had to "play catchup" precisely because they depend
> >>>> upon kernel internals,
> >>>> which constantly change.
> >>> I agree with you and DaveA here. Software user-space debuggers are
> >>> dependent on kernel internals (which can change from time-to-time) and
> >>> will have to play catch-up (which has been the case since the very
> >>> start).
> >>>
> >>> Unfortunately we don't have any clear ABI for software debugging tools -
> >>> may be something to look for in future.
> >>>
> >>> A case in point is gdb/kgdb, which still needs to run with KASLR
> >>> turned-off (nokaslr) for debugging, as it confuses gdb which resolve
> >>> kernel symbol address from symbol table of vmlinux. But we can
> >>> work-around the same in makedumpfile/crash by reading the 'kaslr_offset'
> >>> value. And I have several users telling me now they cannot use gdb on
> >>> KASLR enabled kernel to debug panics, but can makedumpfile + crash
> >>> combination to achieve the same.
> >>>
> >>> So, we should be looking to fix these utilities which are broken since
> >>> the 52-bit changes for arm64. Accordingly, I will try to send the v6
> >>> soon while incorporating the comments posted on the v5.
> >> Any update on the next v6 version. Since this patch series is fixing the
> >> current broken kdump so need this series to add some more fields in
> >> vmcoreinfo for Pointer Authentication work.
> > Sorry for the delay. I was caught up in some other urgent arm64
> > user-space issues.
> > I am preparing the v6 now and hopefully will be able to post it out
> > for review later today.
>
> Did v6 get sent out?
Like I mentioned in a different thread reply, I did not put out the
user-space changes just yet, since we are waiting for the kernel
patches to be accepted first.
In the last review cycle (v5) we had inconsistencies between the
user-space and kernel as user-space utilities like crash accepted the
v5 patches while we had to respin the v6 for the kernel side.
But since a few other Red Hat arm partners have asked for the same,
please find below my public github trees (with prescribed branches),
which you can use for testing the v6 kernel patchset:
1. makedumpfile:
<https://github.com/bhupesh-sharma/makedumpfile/tree/52-bit-va-support-via-vmcore-upstream-v6-rebase>
2. crash-utility:
<https://github.com/bhupesh-sharma/crash/tree/52-bit-va-support-via-vmcore-upstream-v6-rebase>
Hope this helps.
Thanks,
Bhupesh