From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
Cc: Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
"kexec@lists.infradead.org" <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Geng Hui <hui.geng@huawei.com>, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] ARM: kdump: 2nd kernel should use strict pfn_valid in SPARSEMEM platform
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 09:01:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140529080151.GB29812@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5386BD6A.7020509@linaro.org>
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 05:54:02AM +0100, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> Catalin, Will
>
> Can we assume that HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID is alway yes on arm64?
> Looking at arm64/Kconfig,
> config ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL
> def_bool y if SPARSEMEM
> ...
> config HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID
> def_bool ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL || !SPARSEMEM
>
> is this intentional?
Looks like an artifact of the way we constructed those option, so yes, we
could just make that a def_bool y if you like.
Will
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH RESEND] ARM: kdump: 2nd kernel should use strict pfn_valid in SPARSEMEM platform
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 09:01:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140529080151.GB29812@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5386BD6A.7020509@linaro.org>
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 05:54:02AM +0100, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> Catalin, Will
>
> Can we assume that HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID is alway yes on arm64?
> Looking at arm64/Kconfig,
> config ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL
> def_bool y if SPARSEMEM
> ...
> config HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID
> def_bool ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL || !SPARSEMEM
>
> is this intentional?
Looks like an artifact of the way we constructed those option, so yes, we
could just make that a def_bool y if you like.
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <Catalin.Marinas@arm.com>,
Wang Nan <wangnan0@huawei.com>,
Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
"kexec@lists.infradead.org" <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Geng Hui <hui.geng@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] ARM: kdump: 2nd kernel should use strict pfn_valid in SPARSEMEM platform
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 09:01:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140529080151.GB29812@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5386BD6A.7020509@linaro.org>
On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 05:54:02AM +0100, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> Catalin, Will
>
> Can we assume that HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID is alway yes on arm64?
> Looking at arm64/Kconfig,
> config ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL
> def_bool y if SPARSEMEM
> ...
> config HAVE_ARCH_PFN_VALID
> def_bool ARCH_HAS_HOLES_MEMORYMODEL || !SPARSEMEM
>
> is this intentional?
Looks like an artifact of the way we constructed those option, so yes, we
could just make that a def_bool y if you like.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-29 8:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-28 8:44 [PATCH RESEND] ARM: kdump: 2nd kernel should use strict pfn_valid in SPARSEMEM platform Wang Nan
2014-05-28 8:44 ` Wang Nan
2014-05-28 8:44 ` Wang Nan
2014-05-29 4:54 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2014-05-29 4:54 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2014-05-29 4:54 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2014-05-29 8:01 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2014-05-29 8:01 ` Will Deacon
2014-05-29 8:01 ` Will Deacon
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=20140529080151.GB29812@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=Catalin.Marinas@arm.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=hui.geng@huawei.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
--cc=wangnan0@huawei.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.