Re: [PATCH] Make extended crashkernel= syntax less confusing

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 11:36:27 +1000 (EST)
Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au> wrote:

> The extended crashkernel syntax is a little confusing in the
> way it handles ranges. eg:
> 
>  crashkernel=512M-2G:64M,2G-:128M
> 
> Means if the machine has between 512M and 2G of memory the
> crash region should be 64M, and if the machine has 2G of
> memory the region should be 64M. Only if the machine has
> more than 2G memory will 128M be allocated.
> 
> Although that semantic is correct, it is somewhat baffling.
> Instead I propose that the end of the range means the first
> address past the end of the range, ie: 512M up to but not
> including 2G.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>
> Acked-by: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>
> ---
> 
>  kernel/kexec.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/kexec.c b/kernel/kexec.c
> index 6782dce..0ab5e33 100644
> --- a/kernel/kexec.c
> +++ b/kernel/kexec.c
> @@ -1217,7 +1217,7 @@ static int __init parse_crashkernel_mem(char 			*cmdline,
>  		}
>  
>  		/* match ? */
> -		if (system_ram >= start && system_ram <= end) {
> +		if (system_ram >= start && system_ram < end) {
>  			*crash_size = size;
>  			break;
>  		}

I'm a bit surprised to see the code being updated but not the
documentation.  Were they out of sync before or are they out of sync after
this patch or were they always in sync or what?


_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec