On 4/30/24 08:02, Baoquan He wrote:
On 04/29/24 at 12:52pm, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 11:40:16AM +0800, Mingzheng Xing wrote:
On 4/23/24 21:12, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 10:55:44PM +0800, Mingzheng Xing wrote:
On 4/19/24 21:58, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 08:26:07PM +0800, Mingzheng Xing wrote: > On 4/19/24 18:44, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: >> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 04:56:47PM +0800, Mingzheng Xing wrote: >>> This reverts commit 1d6cd2146c2b58bc91266db1d5d6a5f9632e14c0 which has been >>> merged into the mainline commit 39365395046f ("riscv: kdump: use generic >>> interface to simplify crashkernel reservation"), but the latter's series of >>> patches are not included in the 6.6 branch. >>> >>> This will result in the loss of Crash kernel data in /proc/iomem, and kdump >>> loading the kernel will also cause an error: >>> >>> ``` >>> Memory for crashkernel is not reserved >>> Please reserve memory by passing"crashkernel=Y@X" parameter to kernel >>> Then try to loading kdump kernel >>> ``` >>> >>> After revert this patch, verify that it works properly on QEMU riscv. >>> >>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/ZSiQRDGLZk7lpakE@MiWiFi-R3L-srv >>> Signed-off-by: Mingzheng Xing xingmingzheng@iscas.ac.cn >>> --- >> >> I do not understand, what branch is this for? Why have you not cc:ed >> any of the original developers here? Why does Linus's tree not have the >> same problem? And the first sentence above does not make much sense as >> a 6.6 change is merged into 6.7? > > Sorry, I'll try to explain it more clearly. > > This commit 1d6cd2146c2b ("riscv: kdump: fix crashkernel reserving problem > on RISC-V") should not have existed because this patch has been merged into > another larger patch [1]. Here is that complete series:
What "larger patch"? It is in Linus's tree, so it's not part of something different, right? I'm confused.
Hi, Greg
The email Cc:ed to author Chen Jiahao was bounced by the system, so maybe we can wait for Baoquan He to confirm.
This is indeed a bit confusing. The Fixes: tag in 1d6cd2146c2b58 is a false reference. If I understand correctly, this is similar to the following scenario:
A Fixes B, B doesn't go into linus mainline. C contains A, C goes into linus mainline 6.7, and C has more reconstruction code. but A goes into 6.6, so it doesn't make sense for A to be in the mainline, and there's no C in 6.6 but there's an A, thus resulting in an incomplete code that creates an error.
The link I quoted [1] shows that Baoquan had expressed an opinion on this at the time.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/ZSiQRDGLZk7lpakE@MiWiFi-R3L-srv [1]
I'm sorry, but I still do not understand what I need to do here for a stable branch. Do I need to apply something? Revert something? Something else?
Hi, Greg
I saw Baoquan's reply in thread[1], thanks Baoquan for confirming.
So I think the right thing to do would be just to REVERT the commit 1d6cd2146c2b ("riscv: kdump: fix crashkernel reserving problem on RISC-V") in the 6.6.y branch, which is exactly the patch I submitted. If I need to make changes to my commit message, feel free to let me know and I'll post the second version.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/ZihbAYMOI4ylazpt@MiWiFi-R3L-srv [1]
Can someone just send me a patch series showing EXACTLY what needs to be done here, as I am _still_ confused.
I think Mingzheng's patch is good to apply in the 6.6.y stable branch.
Hi Mingzheng,
Can you resend this patch to Greg and stable@vger.kernel.org and CC me? I would like to Ack your patch, but can't find the original patch since you didn't cc me.
Hi, Greg, Baoquan,
I sent the second version [1]. Thank you for taking the time.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/20240430032403.19562-1-xingmingzheng@iscas.ac... [1]
Best wishes Mingzheng
Thanks Baoquan