From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
james.morse@arm.com, geoff@infradead.org,
bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com, dyoung@redhat.com,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v29 9/9] Documentation: dt: chosen properties for arm64 kdump
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 11:13:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170117111323.GB11939@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170116082505.GL20972@linaro.org>
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 05:25:07PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:17:56AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 06:13:49PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 03:39:45PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > > arm64 we should either ensure that /proc/iomem is consistently usable
> > > > (and have userspace consistently use it), or we should expose a new file
> > > > specifically to expose this information.
> > >
> > > The thing that I had in my mind when adding this property is that
> > > /proc/iomem would be obsolete in the future, then we should have
> > > an alternative in hand.
> >
> > Ok.
> >
> > My disagreement is with using the DT as a channel to convey information
> > from the kernel to userspace.
> >
> > I'm more than happy for a new file or other mechanism to express this
> > information. For example, we could add
> > /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_{base,size} or similar.
>
> It may make sense because /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_size already exists,
> so why not kexec_crash_base?
> My concern, however, is that this kind of interface might prevent us from
> allowing multiple regions to be reserved for crash dump kernel in the future.
> (There is an assumption that we have only one region at least on arm64 though.)
Ok.
If we need to handle that, we should also update the description of
linux,usable-memory-range to allow multiple entries (and probably
s/range/ranges).
Thanks,
Mark.
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: mark.rutland@arm.com (Mark Rutland)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v29 9/9] Documentation: dt: chosen properties for arm64 kdump
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 11:13:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170117111323.GB11939@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170116082505.GL20972@linaro.org>
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 05:25:07PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:17:56AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 06:13:49PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 03:39:45PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > > arm64 we should either ensure that /proc/iomem is consistently usable
> > > > (and have userspace consistently use it), or we should expose a new file
> > > > specifically to expose this information.
> > >
> > > The thing that I had in my mind when adding this property is that
> > > /proc/iomem would be obsolete in the future, then we should have
> > > an alternative in hand.
> >
> > Ok.
> >
> > My disagreement is with using the DT as a channel to convey information
> > from the kernel to userspace.
> >
> > I'm more than happy for a new file or other mechanism to express this
> > information. For example, we could add
> > /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_{base,size} or similar.
>
> It may make sense because /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_size already exists,
> so why not kexec_crash_base?
> My concern, however, is that this kind of interface might prevent us from
> allowing multiple regions to be reserved for crash dump kernel in the future.
> (There is an assumption that we have only one region at least on arm64 though.)
Ok.
If we need to handle that, we should also update the description of
linux,usable-memory-range to allow multiple entries (and probably
s/range/ranges).
Thanks,
Mark.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
james.morse@arm.com, geoff@infradead.org,
bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com, dyoung@redhat.com,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v29 9/9] Documentation: dt: chosen properties for arm64 kdump
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 11:13:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170117111323.GB11939@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170116082505.GL20972@linaro.org>
On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 05:25:07PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:17:56AM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 06:13:49PM +0900, AKASHI Takahiro wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 03:39:45PM +0000, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > > > arm64 we should either ensure that /proc/iomem is consistently usable
> > > > (and have userspace consistently use it), or we should expose a new file
> > > > specifically to expose this information.
> > >
> > > The thing that I had in my mind when adding this property is that
> > > /proc/iomem would be obsolete in the future, then we should have
> > > an alternative in hand.
> >
> > Ok.
> >
> > My disagreement is with using the DT as a channel to convey information
> > from the kernel to userspace.
> >
> > I'm more than happy for a new file or other mechanism to express this
> > information. For example, we could add
> > /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_{base,size} or similar.
>
> It may make sense because /sys/kernel/kexec_crash_size already exists,
> so why not kexec_crash_base?
> My concern, however, is that this kind of interface might prevent us from
> allowing multiple regions to be reserved for crash dump kernel in the future.
> (There is an assumption that we have only one region at least on arm64 though.)
Ok.
If we need to handle that, we should also update the description of
linux,usable-memory-range to allow multiple entries (and probably
s/range/ranges).
Thanks,
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-17 11:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 90+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-28 4:33 [PATCH v29 0/9] arm64: add kdump support AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:33 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:35 ` [PATCH v29 1/9] memblock: add memblock_cap_memory_range() AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:35 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:35 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-10 11:16 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-10 11:16 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-10 11:16 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-11 1:57 ` Dennis Chen
2017-01-11 1:57 ` Dennis Chen
2017-01-11 1:57 ` Dennis Chen
2016-12-28 4:35 ` [PATCH v29 2/9] arm64: limit memory regions based on DT property, usable-memory-range AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:35 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` [PATCH v29 3/9] arm64: kdump: reserve memory for crash dump kernel AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-12 15:09 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-12 15:09 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-13 8:16 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-13 8:16 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-13 11:39 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-13 11:39 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-17 8:20 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-17 8:20 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-17 11:54 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-17 11:54 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-19 9:49 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-19 9:49 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-19 11:28 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-19 11:28 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-23 9:51 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-23 9:51 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-23 10:23 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-23 10:23 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-24 7:55 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-24 7:55 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` [PATCH v29 4/9] arm64: kdump: implement machine_crash_shutdown() AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-10 11:32 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-10 11:32 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-11 6:36 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-11 6:36 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-11 10:54 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-11 10:54 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-12 4:21 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-12 4:21 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-12 12:01 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-12 12:01 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-23 17:46 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-23 17:46 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-24 7:52 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-24 7:52 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` [PATCH v29 5/9] arm64: kdump: add VMCOREINFO's for user-space tools AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` [PATCH v29 6/9] arm64: kdump: provide /proc/vmcore file AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` [PATCH v29 7/9] arm64: kdump: enable kdump in defconfig AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` [PATCH v29 8/9] Documentation: kdump: describe arm64 port AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:36 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:37 ` [PATCH v29 9/9] Documentation: dt: chosen properties for arm64 kdump AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:37 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2016-12-28 4:37 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-10 11:10 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-10 11:10 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-10 11:10 ` Will Deacon
2017-01-12 15:39 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-12 15:39 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-12 15:39 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-13 9:13 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-13 9:13 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-13 9:13 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-13 11:17 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-13 11:17 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-13 11:17 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-16 8:25 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-16 8:25 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-16 8:25 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-17 8:26 ` Dave Young
2017-01-17 8:26 ` Dave Young
2017-01-17 8:26 ` Dave Young
2017-01-19 9:01 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-19 9:01 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-19 9:01 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-17 11:13 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2017-01-17 11:13 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-17 11:13 ` Mark Rutland
2017-01-06 3:26 ` [PATCH v29 0/9] arm64: add kdump support Pratyush Anand
2017-01-06 3:26 ` Pratyush Anand
2017-01-06 4:34 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-01-06 4:34 ` AKASHI Takahiro
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=20170117111323.GB11939@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=geoff@infradead.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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.