From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1J50B2-0007ho-0r for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:45:46 +0000 Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2007 09:45:33 -0500 From: Vivek Goyal Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] kexec build system updates, to allow cross-kexec()ing Message-ID: <20071219144533.GB14092@redhat.com> References: <1197967675.854275.930419561848.0.gpush@pokey> <20071218232558.GA14092@redhat.com> <20071219143822.GA17705@nlxdcldnl2.cl.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071219143822.GA17705@nlxdcldnl2.cl.intel.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: kexec-bounces@lists.infradead.org Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Jeremy Kerr , kexec@lists.infradead.org, dnlombar@ichips.intel.com On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 06:38:22AM -0800, Lombard, David N wrote: > On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 06:25:58PM -0500, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 05:47:55PM +0900, Jeremy Kerr wrote: > > > > > This allows us to kexec a powerpc64 kernel from a powerpc userspace. > > > x86{,_64} users might find this handy too, but I don't have hardware > > > to test. > > > > I think x86 it already happens. I think I can launch 64bit kernel from > > a 32bit kexec. > > You certainly can... > If that's the case why should we build 64 bit purgatory for 32 bit kexec? The only advantage I can think of is I can enter the new 64bit kernel using 64bit entry point instead of 32bit entry point. Is that the intention behind this work? Otherwise one should be able to launch 64bit kernel from a 32bit purgatory (Using 32bit entry point). Thanks Vivek _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec