Re: [PATCH] x86/setup: call early_reserve_memory() earlier

[Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>]

You forgot to Cc Mike, lemme add him.

And drop stable@ too.

On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 01:06:22PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 14.09.21 12:03, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 14.09.2021 11:41, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > > Commit a799c2bd29d19c565 ("x86/setup: Consolidate early memory
> > > reservations") introduced early_reserve_memory() to do all needed
> > > initial memblock_reserve() calls in one function. Unfortunately the
> > > call of early_reserve_memory() is done too late for Xen dom0, as in
> > > some cases a Xen hook called by e820__memory_setup() will need those
> > > memory reservations to have happened already.
> > > 
> > > Move the call of early_reserve_memory() to the beginning of
> > > setup_arch() in order to avoid such problems.
> > > 
> > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Fixes: a799c2bd29d19c565 ("x86/setup: Consolidate early memory 
> > > reservations")
> > > Reported-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >   arch/x86/kernel/setup.c | 24 ++++++++++++------------
> > >   1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > > index 79f164141116..f369c51ec580 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c
> > > @@ -757,6 +757,18 @@ dump_kernel_offset(struct notifier_block *self, 
> > > unsigned long v, void *p)
> > >   void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> > >   {
> > > + /*
> > > +  * Do some memory reservations *before* memory is added to
> > > +  * memblock, so memblock allocations won't overwrite it.
> > > +  * Do it after early param, so we could get (unlikely) panic from
> > > +  * serial.
> > 
> > Hmm, this part of the comment is not only stale now, but gets actively
> > undermined. No idea how likely such a panic() would be, and hence how
> > relevant it is to retain this particular property.
> 
> Ah, right.
> 
> The alternative would be to split it up again. Let's let the x86
> maintainers decide which way is the better one.
> 
> 
> Juergen
> 
> > 
> > Jan
> > 
> > > +  * After this point everything still needed from the boot loader or
> > > +  * firmware or kernel text should be early reserved or marked not
> > > +  * RAM in e820. All other memory is free game.
> > > +  */
> > > + early_reserve_memory();
> > > +
> > >   #ifdef CONFIG_X86_32
> > >           memcpy(&boot_cpu_data, &new_cpu_data, sizeof(new_cpu_data));
> > > @@ -876,18 +888,6 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
> > >           parse_early_param();
> > > - /*
> > > -  * Do some memory reservations *before* memory is added to
> > > -  * memblock, so memblock allocations won't overwrite it.
> > > -  * Do it after early param, so we could get (unlikely) panic from
> > > -  * serial.
> > > -  *
> > > -  * After this point everything still needed from the boot loader or
> > > -  * firmware or kernel text should be early reserved or marked not
> > > -  * RAM in e820. All other memory is free game.
> > > -  */
> > > - early_reserve_memory();
> > > -
> > >   #ifdef CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG
> > >           /*
> > >            * Memory used by the kernel cannot be hot-removed because Linux
> > > 
> > 
> 






-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette