All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	yhlu.kernel@gmail.com, vgoyal@redhat.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Move dma32_reserve_bootmem() after reserve_crashkernel()
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 23:36:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080718213622.GA14603@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1216400873-21862-1-git-send-email-bwalle@suse.de>


* Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de> wrote:

> On a x86-64 machine (nothing special I could encounter) I had the 
> problem that crashkernel reservation with the usual "64M@16M" failed. 
> While debugging that, I encountered that dma32_reserve_bootmem() 
> reserves a memory region which is in that area.
> 
> Because dma32_reserve_bootmem() does not rely on a specific offset but 
> crashkernel does, it makes sense to move the dma32_reserve_bootmem() 
> reservation down a bit. I tested that patch and it works without 
> problems. I don't see any negative effects of that move, but maybe I 
> oversaw something ...
> 
> While we strictly don't need that patch in 2.6.27 because we have the 
> automatic, dynamic offset detection, it makes sense to also include it 
> here because:
> 
>   - it's easier to get it in -stable then,
>   - many people are still used to the 'crashkernel=...@16M' syntax,
>   - not everybody may be using a reloatable kernel.

applied to tip/x86/crashdump, thanks Bernhard.

	Ingo

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

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>
Cc: yhlu.kernel@gmail.com, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, vgoyal@redhat.com,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: Move dma32_reserve_bootmem() after reserve_crashkernel()
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2008 23:36:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080718213622.GA14603@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1216400873-21862-1-git-send-email-bwalle@suse.de>


* Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de> wrote:

> On a x86-64 machine (nothing special I could encounter) I had the 
> problem that crashkernel reservation with the usual "64M@16M" failed. 
> While debugging that, I encountered that dma32_reserve_bootmem() 
> reserves a memory region which is in that area.
> 
> Because dma32_reserve_bootmem() does not rely on a specific offset but 
> crashkernel does, it makes sense to move the dma32_reserve_bootmem() 
> reservation down a bit. I tested that patch and it works without 
> problems. I don't see any negative effects of that move, but maybe I 
> oversaw something ...
> 
> While we strictly don't need that patch in 2.6.27 because we have the 
> automatic, dynamic offset detection, it makes sense to also include it 
> here because:
> 
>   - it's easier to get it in -stable then,
>   - many people are still used to the 'crashkernel=...@16M' syntax,
>   - not everybody may be using a reloatable kernel.

applied to tip/x86/crashdump, thanks Bernhard.

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2008-07-18 21:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-07-17 22:15 [PATCH] x86: Move crashkernel reservation before dma32_reserve_bootmem() Bernhard Walle
2008-07-17 22:15 ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-17 22:50 ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-17 22:50   ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-18  9:52   ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-18  9:52     ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-18 16:22     ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-18 16:22       ` Yinghai Lu
2008-07-18 17:07       ` [PATCH] x86: Move dma32_reserve_bootmem() after reserve_crashkernel() Bernhard Walle
2008-07-18 17:07         ` Bernhard Walle
2008-07-18 21:36         ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-07-18 21:36           ` Ingo Molnar

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=20080718213622.GA14603@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=bwalle@suse.de \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=yhlu.kernel@gmail.com \
    /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.