Re: [PATCH 0/3] Early use of boot service memory

[Ingo Molnar <mingo-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>]

* jerry.hoemann-VXdhtT5mjnY@public.gmane.org <jerry.hoemann-VXdhtT5mjnY@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 08:44:04PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:04 PM,  <jerry.hoemann-VXdhtT5mjnY@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > Making this issue a quirk will be a lot more practical.  Its a small, focused
> > > change whose implications are limited and more easily understood.
> > 
> > There's nothing practical with requiring users to pass a kernel option
> > to make kdump work.  It's a workaround, sure, but it's not a proper
> > fix.
> 
> One already has to specify command line arguments to enable kdump. 
> See "crashkernel=" in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt.

That option is already a usability barrier. Adding yet another 
usability barrier improves things how?

> As i said in an earlier mail we are working w/ distros. [...]

The point being?

> [...]  distros can and do specify lots of interesting command line 
> arguments for their systems.  Distros have tools for configuring 
> kdump. User must already use these tools or manually edit multiple 
> config files, to get kdump to work.  I would work with distros to 
> help integrate this change into their tools.

Here you describe a method that has already successfully cut the kdump 
user base to a fraction of its potential size. Why should we assist to 
that effort of engineered obscurity?

> As i said in earlier mail, i am willing to change implementation to 
> some type of black/white listing.

Is it possible to fix it the way hpa suggested?

Thanks,

	Ingo