Hi Lianbo,
I have sent the V2 now. Got delayed due to me earlier not being able to test the V2.
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:55:06AM +0530, Aditya Gupta wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 01:55:32PM +0800, lijiang wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > diff --git a/ppc64.c b/ppc64.c
> > index fc34006f4863..1159b8c3a8e7 100644
> > --- a/ppc64.c
> > +++ b/ppc64.c
> > @@ -298,6 +298,15 @@ struct machine_specific book3e_machine_specific = {
> > .is_vmaddr = book3e_is_vmaddr,
> > };
> >
> > +/**
> > + * No additional checks are required on PPC64, for checking if PRSTATUS
> > notes
> > + * is valid
> > + */
> > +int ppc64_is_cpu_prstatus_valid(int cpu)
> > +{
> > + return TRUE;
> > +}
> > +
> > #define SKIBOOT_BASE 0x30000000
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -418,6 +427,7 @@ ppc64_init(int when)
> > break;
> >
> > case POST_GDB:
> > + machdep->is_cpu_prstatus_valid =
> > ppc64_is_cpu_prstatus_valid;
> >
>
> The hook is set in the stage of POST_GDB, I'm wondering if the current
> warning is still shown in the crash minimal mode(with option --minimal).
> Can you help to confirm this one?
Sure, will check this. Just looked at it, seems the warning might still be there,
if it is minimal mode.
Basically what I wanted is, this machdep->is_cpu_prstatus_valid to be
overwritten, after diskdump_init has run (which sets machdep->is_cpu_prstatus_valid
to a default), and before 'map_cpus_to_prstatus_kdump_cmprs' (where it is used),
will see if the warning comes, will try to understand the flow and move the
code accordingly.
I tested this also. The warning is not shown in minimal mode. Still, your
suggestion was right logically, moved it to PRE_GDB stage in V2, since then we don't
have this ambiguity of the 'is_cpu_prstatus_valid' hook being set or not. Now, it
will be correctly initialised in all cases.
Thanks,
- Aditya Gupta