All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@redhat.com>
Cc: mhuang@redhat.com, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Minfei Huang <mnfhuang@gmail.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, ebiederm@xmission.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/2] kexec: Make a pair of map/unmap reserved pages in error path
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 10:48:36 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160323024836.GC2567@x1.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56D56684.9000908@redhat.com>

On 03/01/16 at 05:53pm, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> This is a bug fix.
> 
> After this, I will try to do a cleanup for crash_unmap/map_reserved_pages()
> (only used by S390) to consolidate it with arch_kexec_unprotect/protect_crashkres().

Hi Xunlei, Minfei,

I think you need discuss together about how to do clean up codes in this
place. From my point of view, arch_map/unmap_reserved_pages and
arch_kexec_protect/unprotect_crashkres() are for the same goal but by
different ways on different arch. So for Xunlei's patchset, you might
need to rethink your implementation, the name of function. I personally
think you just implement a x86 specific arch_map/unmap_reserved_pages.
It may need a more generic name, and then add your x86 arch specific
implementation. Sorry I can't see your patches on my mail client,
Xunlei. Since Andrew asked, I just checked these.

I am fine with Minfei's patch 1/2. But for patch 2/2, it's a little
comfortable to me. Is it really necessary to abstract code block from
kexec_load, then wrap them into a newly added function do_kexec_load()?
Without this wrapping is there a way to do your bug fix? Is there
possibility that do_kexec_load will be called in other places? What's
the benefit to wrap it into do_kexec_load against not wrapping?

Thanks
Baoquan

> 
> Regards,
> Xunlei
> 
> On 03/01/2016 at 04:02 PM, Minfei Huang wrote:
> > v1:
> > - Bisect the patch according to Andrew Morton's suggestion
> >
> > Minfei Huang (2):
> >   kexec: Make a pair of map/unmap reserved pages in error path
> >   kexec: Do a cleanup for function kexec_load
> >
> >  kernel/kexec.c | 112 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> >  1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kexec mailing list
> kexec@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

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

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
To: Xunlei Pang <xlpang@redhat.com>
Cc: Minfei Huang <mnfhuang@gmail.com>,
	ebiederm@xmission.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	mhuang@redhat.com, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/2] kexec: Make a pair of map/unmap reserved pages in error path
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 10:48:36 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160323024836.GC2567@x1.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56D56684.9000908@redhat.com>

On 03/01/16 at 05:53pm, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> This is a bug fix.
> 
> After this, I will try to do a cleanup for crash_unmap/map_reserved_pages()
> (only used by S390) to consolidate it with arch_kexec_unprotect/protect_crashkres().

Hi Xunlei, Minfei,

I think you need discuss together about how to do clean up codes in this
place. From my point of view, arch_map/unmap_reserved_pages and
arch_kexec_protect/unprotect_crashkres() are for the same goal but by
different ways on different arch. So for Xunlei's patchset, you might
need to rethink your implementation, the name of function. I personally
think you just implement a x86 specific arch_map/unmap_reserved_pages.
It may need a more generic name, and then add your x86 arch specific
implementation. Sorry I can't see your patches on my mail client,
Xunlei. Since Andrew asked, I just checked these.

I am fine with Minfei's patch 1/2. But for patch 2/2, it's a little
comfortable to me. Is it really necessary to abstract code block from
kexec_load, then wrap them into a newly added function do_kexec_load()?
Without this wrapping is there a way to do your bug fix? Is there
possibility that do_kexec_load will be called in other places? What's
the benefit to wrap it into do_kexec_load against not wrapping?

Thanks
Baoquan

> 
> Regards,
> Xunlei
> 
> On 03/01/2016 at 04:02 PM, Minfei Huang wrote:
> > v1:
> > - Bisect the patch according to Andrew Morton's suggestion
> >
> > Minfei Huang (2):
> >   kexec: Make a pair of map/unmap reserved pages in error path
> >   kexec: Do a cleanup for function kexec_load
> >
> >  kernel/kexec.c | 112 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
> >  1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-)
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kexec mailing list
> kexec@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

  reply	other threads:[~2016-03-23  2:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-03-01  8:02 [PATCH V2 0/2] kexec: Make a pair of map/unmap reserved pages in error path Minfei Huang
2016-03-01  8:02 ` Minfei Huang
2016-03-01  8:02 ` [PATCH V2 1/2] " Minfei Huang
2016-03-01  8:02   ` Minfei Huang
2016-03-01 21:56   ` Andrew Morton
2016-03-01 21:56     ` Andrew Morton
2016-03-02  3:03     ` Minfei Huang
2016-03-02  3:03       ` Minfei Huang
2016-03-01  8:02 ` [PATCH V2 2/2] kexec: Do a cleanup for function kexec_load Minfei Huang
2016-03-01  8:02   ` Minfei Huang
2016-03-01 22:05   ` Andrew Morton
2016-03-01 22:05     ` Andrew Morton
2016-03-01  9:53 ` [PATCH V2 0/2] kexec: Make a pair of map/unmap reserved pages in error path Xunlei Pang
2016-03-01  9:53   ` Xunlei Pang
2016-03-23  2:48   ` Baoquan He [this message]
2016-03-23  2:48     ` Baoquan He
2016-03-23  3:32     ` Xunlei Pang
2016-03-23  3:32       ` Xunlei Pang
2016-03-23  8:23       ` Baoquan He
2016-03-23  8:23         ` Baoquan He
2016-03-23  9:59         ` Xunlei Pang
2016-03-23  9:59           ` Xunlei Pang
2016-03-23 12:32           ` Baoquan He
2016-03-23 12:32             ` Baoquan He
2016-03-24  8:36             ` Xunlei Pang
2016-03-24  8:36               ` Xunlei Pang
2016-03-26 15:17     ` Minfei Huang
2016-03-26 15:17       ` Minfei Huang

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=20160323024836.GC2567@x1.redhat.com \
    --to=bhe@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mhuang@redhat.com \
    --cc=mnfhuang@gmail.com \
    --cc=xlpang@redhat.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.