Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] RISC-V: enable XIP
Date:   Fri, 9 Apr 2021 16:10:15 +0200
Message-Id: <F096121C-8F7A-4E9A-B319-2C5F656610EA@redhat.com>
References: <YHBdzPsHantT9r8t@linux.ibm.com>
Cc:     David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>, Alex Ghiti <alex@ghiti.fr>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        Vitaly Wool <vitaly.wool@konsulko.com>
In-Reply-To: <YHBdzPsHantT9r8t@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>
Precedence: bulk


> Am 09.04.2021 um 15:59 schrieb Mike Rapoport <rppt@linux.ibm.com>:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFOn Fri, Apr 09, 2021 at 02:46:17PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote=
:
>>>>> Also, will that memory properly be exposed in the resource tree as
>>>>> System RAM (e.g., /proc/iomem) ? Otherwise some things (/proc/kcore)
>>>>> won't work as expected - the kernel won't be included in a dump.
>>> Do we really need a XIP kernel to included in kdump?
>>> And does not it sound weird to expose flash as System RAM in /proc/iomem=
? ;-)
>>=20
>> See my other mail, maybe we actually want something different.
>>=20
>>>=20
>>>> I have just checked and it does not appear in /proc/iomem.
>>>>=20
>>>> Ok your conclusion would be to have struct page, I'm going to implement=
 this
>>>> version then using memblock as you described.
>>>=20
>>> I'm not sure this is required. With XIP kernel text never gets into RAM,=
 so
>>> it does not seem to require struct page.
>>>=20
>>> XIP by definition has some limitations relatively to "normal" operation,=

>>> so lack of kdump could be one of them.
>>=20
>> I agree.
>>=20
>>>=20
>>> I might be wrong, but IMHO, artificially creating a memory map for part o=
f
>>> flash would cause more problems in the long run.
>>=20
>> Can you elaborate?
>=20
> Nothing particular, just a gut feeling. Usually, when you force something
> it comes out the wrong way later.
>=20
>>>=20
>>> BTW, how does XIP account the kernel text on other architectures that
>>> implement it?
>>=20
>> Interesting point, I thought XIP would be something new on RISC-V (well, a=
t
>> least to me :) ). If that concept exists already, we better mimic what
>> existing implementations do.
>=20
> I had quick glance at ARM, it seems that kernel text does not have memory
> map and does not show up in System RAM.
>=20

Does it show up in a different way or not at all?

> --=20
> Sincerely yours,
> Mike.
>=20