From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] console: increase initial conring size Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2014 11:40:47 -0500 Message-ID: <20141205164047.GA1584@laptop.dumpdata.com> References: <1417794612-27702-1-git-send-email-daniel.kiper@oracle.com> <5481E99F020000780004D4A9@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Xwvw7-0007fz-TB for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 16:40:55 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5481E99F020000780004D4A9@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: keir@xen.org, ian.campbell@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, Daniel Kiper , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Fri, Dec 05, 2014 at 04:21:35PM +0000, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 05.12.14 at 16:50, wrote: > > This bug (or lack of feature if you prefer) should be fixed, as it > > was pointed out by Jan Beulich and Olaf Hering, by allocating conring > > earlier. I though about that before posting this patch (I did not > > know beforehand about Olaf's work made in 2011). However, I stated > > that it is too late to make so intrusive changes. > > I continue to disagree. If anything, I'd rather see us hide (e.g. behind > opt_cpu_info) some of the worst offenders causing the log to become > that large. Even if yielding a bigger patch, that would have less impact Nowadays the worst offender is the EFI memmap which can be quite big. We could hide it behind 'opt_efi_info' and only print out some rather odd entries. But that would be 4.6 material, while this patch nicely fixes it for 4.5. > functionality wise and likely benefit more people. Nor do I see the > change to move the allocation earlier all that intrusive. > > But then again, considering that all you enlarge is an __initdata item, > perhaps this is acceptable. This has the other side-benefit that it will help us troubleshoot in the field without having the customer try extra parameters to extend the log data. I am all up for less round-trip to troubleshoot issues and I can't see this causing any regressions (unless we have some hard-coded EFL section data). > > Jan >