All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Find offset for crashkernel reservation automatically
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:19:10 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080627141910.GD5801@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080627160656.06f71661@halley.suse.de>

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 04:06:56PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote:
> * Vivek Goyal [2008-06-27 09:42]:
> > 
> > Thinking more about. Let me step back. I think it is not good idea to
> > take this kernel take decision about the capability of kernel being
> > loaded. There is no way we can find out now that if a kernel is capable
> > of running from this memory location or not. This is highly variable. So,
> > please ignore above comment.
> 
> Maybe below 4G makes sense. Because you need some 32 bit memory for DMA.
> That's mostly an architecture limitation, so that could make sense to
> check here.
> 

Even if you need some 32bit memory in the lower regions, kexec can handle
it with backup segment mechanism (currently 640K). We can always increse
the backup region size.

So I would think that it is best to leave it without any checking and 
then let kexec-tools handle it.

Thanks
Vivek

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

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Find offset for crashkernel reservation automatically
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 10:19:10 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080627141910.GD5801@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080627160656.06f71661@halley.suse.de>

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 04:06:56PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote:
> * Vivek Goyal [2008-06-27 09:42]:
> > 
> > Thinking more about. Let me step back. I think it is not good idea to
> > take this kernel take decision about the capability of kernel being
> > loaded. There is no way we can find out now that if a kernel is capable
> > of running from this memory location or not. This is highly variable. So,
> > please ignore above comment.
> 
> Maybe below 4G makes sense. Because you need some 32 bit memory for DMA.
> That's mostly an architecture limitation, so that could make sense to
> check here.
> 

Even if you need some 32bit memory in the lower regions, kexec can handle
it with backup segment mechanism (currently 640K). We can always increse
the backup region size.

So I would think that it is best to leave it without any checking and 
then let kexec-tools handle it.

Thanks
Vivek

  reply	other threads:[~2008-06-27 14:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-06-26 19:54 [PATCH] x86: Find offset for crashkernel reservation automatically Bernhard Walle
2008-06-26 19:54 ` Bernhard Walle
2008-06-27 13:32 ` Vivek Goyal
2008-06-27 13:32   ` Vivek Goyal
2008-06-27 13:42   ` Vivek Goyal
2008-06-27 13:42     ` Vivek Goyal
2008-06-27 14:06     ` Bernhard Walle
2008-06-27 14:06       ` Bernhard Walle
2008-06-27 14:19       ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2008-06-27 14:19         ` Vivek Goyal
2008-06-27 14:22         ` Bernhard Walle
2008-06-27 14:22           ` Bernhard Walle
2008-06-27 18:00           ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-06-27 18:00             ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-06-27 18:29             ` Bernhard Walle
2008-06-27 18:29               ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-03 13:14               ` Ingo Molnar
2008-07-03 13:14                 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-07-14  7:11   ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-14  7:11     ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-14  9:24     ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-14  9:24       ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-14  9:44       ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-07-14  9:44         ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-07-14 17:06         ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-14 17:06           ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-14 17:30           ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-07-14 17:30             ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-07-14 18:17             ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-14 18:17               ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-14 18:41               ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-07-14 18:41                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-07-14 18:47                 ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-14 18:47                   ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-14 18:55                   ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-07-14 18:55                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2008-07-14 19:08                     ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-14 19:08                       ` Yinghai Lu

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20080627141910.GD5801@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=bwalle@suse.de \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=x86@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.