From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]) by canuck.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.72 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1PBRYB-0007g2-Mf for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 28 Oct 2010 12:25:48 +0000 Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 14:25:40 +0200 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec_load manpage Message-ID: <20101028122540.GA29759@basil.fritz.box> References: <20100619132633.GA24277@basil.fritz.box> <20101024213802.GB9922@basil.fritz.box> <20101028121417.GD16206@verge.net.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101028121417.GD16206@verge.net.au> 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=twosheds.infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Simon Horman Cc: linux-man@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen , Kexec Mailing List , Michael Kerrisk , "Eric W. Biederman" On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:14:17PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 11:38:02PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 04:56:24PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > > > Hey Andi, > > > > > > I'd like to push this page out the door, but I'm blocked doing so > > > until I hear back from you regarding the question below (plus a new > > > version of the page, if needed please). > > > > Probably. Eric should know. > > > > Frankly without an header the syscall is pretty much unusable > > for normal programs anyways, so I gave up on this. > > I'm not sure that I ever understood the impasse over the header. It's basically: should kexec_load only be used from kexec(8) or is it a generally available syscall. If the former is true no header or manpage is needed. For the later both are. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only. _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec_load manpage Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 14:25:40 +0200 Message-ID: <20101028122540.GA29759@basil.fritz.box> References: <20100619132633.GA24277@basil.fritz.box> <20101024213802.GB9922@basil.fritz.box> <20101028121417.GD16206@verge.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101028121417.GD16206-/R6kz+dDXgpPR4JQBCEnsQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-man-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Simon Horman Cc: Andi Kleen , Michael Kerrisk , linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Kexec Mailing List , "Eric W. Biederman" List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:14:17PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 11:38:02PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 04:56:24PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote: > > > Hey Andi, > > > > > > I'd like to push this page out the door, but I'm blocked doing so > > > until I hear back from you regarding the question below (plus a new > > > version of the page, if needed please). > > > > Probably. Eric should know. > > > > Frankly without an header the syscall is pretty much unusable > > for normal programs anyways, so I gave up on this. > > I'm not sure that I ever understood the impasse over the header. It's basically: should kexec_load only be used from kexec(8) or is it a generally available syscall. If the former is true no header or manpage is needed. For the later both are. -Andi -- ak-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org -- Speaking for myself only. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html