From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org, dyoung@redhat.com, vgoyal@redhat.com,
bhe@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec: allocate buffer in top-down, if specified, correctly
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 16:33:34 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2404647.dtAsaUPUyE@morokweng> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170428005135.GA3963@fireball>
Am Freitag, 28. April 2017, 09:51:39 BRT schrieb AKASHI Takahiro:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 07:00:04PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, 26. April 2017, 17:22:09 BRT schrieb AKASHI Takahiro:
> > > The current kexec_locate_mem_hole(kbuf.top_down == 1) stops searching at
> > > the first memory region that has enough space for requested size even if
> > > some of higher regions may also have.
> >
> > kexec_locate_mem_hole expects arch_kexec_walk_mem to walk memory from top
> > to bottom if top_down is true. That is what powerpc's version does.
>
> Ah, I haven't noticed that, but x86 doesn't have arch_kexec_walk_mem and
> how can it work for x86?
Looking at v4.9's kexec_add_buffer, the logic has been this way before I
factored kexec_locate_mem_hole out of it. So x86 has been behaving this way
for a while.
> > Isn't it possible to walk resources from top to bottom?
>
> Yes, it will be, but it seems to me that such a behavior is not intuitive
> and even confusing if it doesn't come with explicit explanation.
Yes, I should have put a comment pointing out that assumption.
--
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: AKASHI Takahiro <takahiro.akashi@linaro.org>
Cc: dyoung@redhat.com, bhe@redhat.com, vgoyal@redhat.com,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec: allocate buffer in top-down, if specified, correctly
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 16:33:34 -0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2404647.dtAsaUPUyE@morokweng> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170428005135.GA3963@fireball>
Am Freitag, 28. April 2017, 09:51:39 BRT schrieb AKASHI Takahiro:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 07:00:04PM -0300, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Am Mittwoch, 26. April 2017, 17:22:09 BRT schrieb AKASHI Takahiro:
> > > The current kexec_locate_mem_hole(kbuf.top_down == 1) stops searching at
> > > the first memory region that has enough space for requested size even if
> > > some of higher regions may also have.
> >
> > kexec_locate_mem_hole expects arch_kexec_walk_mem to walk memory from top
> > to bottom if top_down is true. That is what powerpc's version does.
>
> Ah, I haven't noticed that, but x86 doesn't have arch_kexec_walk_mem and
> how can it work for x86?
Looking at v4.9's kexec_add_buffer, the logic has been this way before I
factored kexec_locate_mem_hole out of it. So x86 has been behaving this way
for a while.
> > Isn't it possible to walk resources from top to bottom?
>
> Yes, it will be, but it seems to me that such a behavior is not intuitive
> and even confusing if it doesn't come with explicit explanation.
Yes, I should have put a comment pointing out that assumption.
--
Thiago Jung Bauermann
IBM Linux Technology Center
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-28 19:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-04-26 8:22 [PATCH] kexec: allocate buffer in top-down, if specified, correctly AKASHI Takahiro
2017-04-26 8:22 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-04-27 22:00 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-04-27 22:00 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-04-28 0:51 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-04-28 0:51 ` AKASHI Takahiro
2017-04-28 5:19 ` Dave Young
2017-04-28 5:19 ` Dave Young
2017-04-28 5:23 ` Dave Young
2017-04-28 5:23 ` Dave Young
2017-04-28 19:33 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann [this message]
2017-04-28 19:33 ` Thiago Jung Bauermann
2017-04-28 4:46 ` Dave Young
2017-04-28 4:46 ` Dave Young
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=2404647.dtAsaUPUyE@morokweng \
--to=bauerman@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=takahiro.akashi@linaro.org \
--cc=vgoyal@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.