powerpc/crashkernel: Take "mem=" option into account
authorPingfan Liu <kernelfans@gmail.com>
Wed, 1 Apr 2020 14:00:44 +0000 (22:00 +0800)
committerGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Wed, 24 Jun 2020 15:48:29 +0000 (17:48 +0200)
commit5b2a4f514370ec81a5b76c71b0f870c239f350c0
treec86da14ee4ef4c6edabf922d3f8448e1b6d345ce
parentfb3052ffaf526514598aa49c54aa4553615fabb3
powerpc/crashkernel: Take "mem=" option into account

[ Upstream commit be5470e0c285a68dc3afdea965032f5ddc8269d7 ]

'mem=" option is an easy way to put high pressure on memory during
some test. Hence after applying the memory limit, instead of total
mem, the actual usable memory should be considered when reserving mem
for crashkernel. Otherwise the boot up may experience OOM issue.

E.g. it would reserve 4G prior to the change and 512M afterward, if
passing
crashkernel="2G-4G:384M,4G-16G:512M,16G-64G:1G,64G-128G:2G,128G-:4G",
and mem=5G on a 256G machine.

This issue is powerpc specific because it puts higher priority on
fadump and kdump reservation than on "mem=". Referring the following
code:
    if (fadump_reserve_mem() == 0)
            reserve_crashkernel();
    ...
    /* Ensure that total memory size is page-aligned. */
    limit = ALIGN(memory_limit ?: memblock_phys_mem_size(), PAGE_SIZE);
    memblock_enforce_memory_limit(limit);

While on other arches, the effect of "mem=" takes a higher priority
and pass through memblock_phys_mem_size() before calling
reserve_crashkernel().

Signed-off-by: Pingfan Liu <kernelfans@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1585749644-4148-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
arch/powerpc/kexec/core.c