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 kernelAfter 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]
Thanks, Mingzheng
confused,
greg k-h