Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 26 May 2023 17:12:46 +0200 | Subject | Re: Bug report: kernel paniced when system hibernates | From | Alexandre Ghiti <> |
| |
On 26/05/2023 16:59, Conor Dooley wrote: > On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 03:14:33PM +0200, Alexandre Ghiti wrote: >> Hi everyone, >> >> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 11:24 PM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: >>> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 01:06:04PM -0700, Atish Patra wrote: >>>> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 11:39 AM Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org> wrote: >>>>> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 11:37:40AM -0700, Atish Patra wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Any testing of hibernation still needs to revert the patch until we >>>>>> have the proper fix. >>>>> "the patch" is what exactly? I assume you don't mean depending on >>>>> NONPORTABLE, since that is a Kconfig option. >>>> Nope. Sorry I meant the commit >>>> >>>> 3335068 ("riscv: Use PUD/P4D/PGD pages for the linear mapping") >>> Ah, if your SBI implementation is one of the affected ones, yeah. >>> If not, you can just set NONPORTABLE :) >> @Björn Töpel emitted the idea of excluding from the hibernation all >> the memory nodes in the "/reserved-memory" node >> (https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.4-rc1/source/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/reserved-memory.yaml): >> I have to admit that I don't see why it is not done by default by the >> kernel. > My understanding was that it was perfectly fine to use reserved memory > nodes to fence off some memory to use in device drivers etc, which then > may need to be saved/restored.
Agreed, but I would say that it's up to the driver then to take care of that, see https://docs.kernel.org/driver-api/pm/notifiers.html
>> Unless there is stuff in this node that needs to be "hibernated", I >> think that would be a very good solution since we would not rely on >> the name of the "internal" nodes of "/reserved-memory" (i.e. >> "mmode_resv"). >> >> I'm digging into why it is not done by default, just wanted to have >> your feedback before the week-end :)
| |