Received: by 2002:a05:6a11:4021:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id ky33csp1704946pxb; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 03:23:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzOwOg+OCbtncz8y9avonYk8c5XzwZ1HY6xkWuB+Xd1IM23czUzKkX13WmFsEtDu/NWnv+B X-Received: by 2002:a50:d80f:: with SMTP id o15mr28117440edj.52.1632133398761; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 03:23:18 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1632133398; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=en3Go+NBA75TB5dUwCbFe3MnrhOrAMzMNBb+9QTcStG15u3XGcCVJasAqcqeWNSXbD H6P9nMNMTxpceJtGhOqpfDk/L6un2mF1ikuTkiufp4DjJYoDZ/1TtCr3cEqrKaHYFgh+ APmn0THPN4Yzswv17BEXn7t3uFdRjZJdLZTQr1EnfojFuaAz6ALmqKAyFz6gmbfDRm51 biT5l7ZTfoQl52uxTyT2c21IqpMI1C3+6g2j+W17aN+FJsroyHPKaGBKXzmQCvrrTwre 9je8mvNkvC+dpXzJw+cCm0S/LcNV9QiqTrGOJFfbv7fPbTKuBkf245j77CzNNnJlMyL3 92Jg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:dkim-signature; bh=ETtu+5Pc20bD6D7zi+b403rZ0SKWKGkwZh6X1dWOqn8=; b=fl3L1Lp6MeKKL4Ma4N5OjpinuTzNAxfTtD6kxJib6rkVxF902fYgmtOp/1CbkuFz2t qWEpNaW9fRVr5hBQD0Nm05MhZzVaOHPP6ta0bukxy0DtDAJ3zWU2j8vHbN468jV3IJtx ADVckq4zT8nJnRWxlB8EBUG409csyuiIcW78tYBvanlEWY28hesjorQXXOOZ7wgRK5J0 WvCcBAexd9Wb6d6rfX4ZEH+O4Pwi9eKpN6l8nftxBsPrjpMYjxkP+JxtEDmYcnaETwNi cPYItpbehS38IpCTri8nAteAZ3UWsPHZbLmszZN8rS1NHTPdHgiLRlCXoOijA15WQD4v D8Ug== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=Zm47I09F; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id n15si19667767edy.70.2021.09.20.03.22.54; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 03:23:18 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@ibm.com header.s=pp1 header.b=Zm47I09F; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=ibm.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235207AbhITJtC (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 20 Sep 2021 05:49:02 -0400 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com ([148.163.156.1]:39404 "EHLO mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229565AbhITJtA (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Sep 2021 05:49:00 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0098394.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 18K9SwpJ025729; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 05:47:05 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=date : from : to : cc : subject : message-id : references : mime-version : content-type : in-reply-to; s=pp1; bh=ETtu+5Pc20bD6D7zi+b403rZ0SKWKGkwZh6X1dWOqn8=; b=Zm47I09FTgx0OO9B2FxhD7LlupZAxb5EysrcUEFUpXDK8NcEqT+vhrsqb/h5EvcqUf/P /L379gAokvRxdVFrq/VjzbLaeqhbmdtkYBNDmCTmBD5JKIWEkSXaLQYO4acy6bUICDdm K4puP1Fz26Ykw2nE00bEO0Q93cjUqimxiL3ajSC8YpOxMdACke+qGCBlrZSTnS1T/3B+ sP0h3s8M4KM8QrrjxXZ4Nfba3SGf2omokFuWi9lCMEXRc1Nnzc2UEXhiZUTSCBBmYEBF Zfpj9e8gz9TcVgVUx3EuaYxmu3b2MjGII6jRNxVPXRd8RXwl8opXHOa2tWUpQQ3/i0Bb qQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3b5w4ddsb3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 20 Sep 2021 05:47:05 -0400 Received: from m0098394.ppops.net (m0098394.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 18K92oe7010353; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 05:47:04 -0400 Received: from ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (63.31.33a9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.51.49.99]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 3b5w4ddsa8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 20 Sep 2021 05:47:04 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 18K9h7PU016918; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:47:01 GMT Received: from b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06relay11.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.109.196]) by ppma04ams.nl.ibm.com with ESMTP id 3b57r96g41-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:47:01 +0000 Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com [9.149.105.62]) by b06cxnps4074.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 18K9kxf751970518 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:46:59 GMT Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46249AE053; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:46:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34E68AE04D; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:46:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from linux.ibm.com (unknown [9.145.153.169]) by d06av26.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:46:58 +0000 (GMT) Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 12:46:56 +0300 From: Mike Rapoport To: Juergen Gross Cc: Borislav Petkov , Mike Galbraith , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org, marmarek@invisiblethingslab.com, Borislav Petkov , stable@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [tip: x86/urgent] x86/setup: Call early_reserve_memory() earlier Message-ID: References: <20210914094108.22482-1-jgross@suse.com> <163178944634.25758.17304720937855121489.tip-bot2@tip-bot2> <4422257385dbee913eb5270bda5fded7fbb993ab.camel@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-GUID: zQnSuITc-914wLdXynIR-gHoPNnryQ9O X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: ghOdFsjfiG0m7Ktz-UmmsDGJMstFKG5o X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.182.1,Aquarius:18.0.790,Hydra:6.0.391,FMLib:17.0.607.475 definitions=2021-09-20_05,2021-09-20_01,2020-04-07_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2109030001 definitions=main-2109200058 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 08:00:31AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 19.09.21 19:15, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 06:55:16PM +0200, Mike Galbraith wrote: > > > On Thu, 2021-09-16 at 10:50 +0000, tip-bot2 for Juergen Gross wrote: > > > > The following commit has been merged into the x86/urgent branch of > > > > tip: > > > > > > > > x86/setup: Call early_reserve_memory() earlier > > > > > > This commit rendered tip toxic to my i4790 desktop box and i5-6200U > > > lappy. Boot for both is instantly over without so much as a twitch. > > > > > > Post bisect revert made both all better. > > > > I had a suspicion that moving stuff around like that would not just > > simply work in all cases, as our boot order is very lovely and fragile. > > > > And it booted just fine on my machines here. > > > > ;-\ > > > > Anyway, commit zapped from the x86/urgent lineup. We'll have to have a > > third try later. > > > > How will that try look like? I'm seeing the following alternatives: > > 1. Just revert a799c2bd29d19c565 ("x86/setup: Consolidate early memory > reservations"). > > 2. Try to move the call of early_reserve_memory() just before the call > of e820__memory_setup(). > > 3. Split early_reserve_memory() into two parts, with the first part > doing the memblock_reserve() calls for the kernel text, initrd and > page 0 right at the start of setup_arch(), and the second part for > the rest at the same place it is handled now. > > 4. Analyze why Mike's systems fail to boot and try to fix his issue(s) > (probably via one of the above ways). > > Looking at the calls done in early_reserve_memory() I have my doubts > that memblock_x86_reserve_range_setup_data() will work before > early_ioremap_init() has been called, as it is using early_memremap(). > This would suggest variant 2 could be a working solution. > > In case I'm wrong with my doubts I'd prefer variant 3. I actually prefer variant 2 to keep the early memory reservations together as much as possible. I tend to agree with your doubts about memblock_x86_reserve_range_setup_data(), but it should be fine to move early_reserve_memory() just before e820__memory_setup(). Anyway, I'd like to understand why Mike's systems fail before moving on with the fixes. -- Sincerely yours, Mike.