All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch 0/7] Implement crashkernel=auto
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 06:37:03 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A7A7A0F.6070906@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1bpmtqxjh.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com> writes:
>
>   
>> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>     
>>> Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com> writes:
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>>>>> No the crashdump mechanism is useless because user space is already
>>>>> broken and unusable.
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> Again, why broken?
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> To get a stock stat drive by hand I had to list about 5 kernel modules
>>> in the right magic order in /etc/kdump.conf
>>>
>>> Neither mount by label or mount by uuid when specified in /etc/kdump.conf
>>> I had to hack mkdumprd to get an initrd that even finds the proper disk
>>> to mount.
>>>   
>>>       
>> You are saying that there is some difficulty to make a initrd for kdump, but I
>> am sorry that I can't see any relations between this and my patch. What is your
>> point here?
>>     
>
> You are trying to make it easier for end users.
>
> I am saying the problem is in user space.
>
> I am saying also that the kernel doesn't have a clue what you are
> going to load with kexec on panic to handle panics.  Maybe it is a
> custom stand alone binary that only needs 5K.  So the kernel doesn't
> have a clue what the right size to reserve.
>   

So what? If you have 8G memory, would you mind 128M-5K memory to be wasted?

The kernel doesn't have to reserve the exact amount of memory that a 
kexec kernel will use, it just finds a big enough size for all cases 
which already assumes the physical memory is large enough.
> I think if what you were proposing was part of some coherent story for
> a complete implementation I would consider it more.  Instead this just
> appears to be a reaction to how frustrating the user space
> implementation is, and fixing things in the kernel instead of in user
> space.
>   

Yes, exactly, in fact I am doing another part which will allow us to 
take back of the reserved memory at run-time.



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch 0/7] Implement crashkernel=auto
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 14:37:03 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A7A7A0F.6070906@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1bpmtqxjh.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>

Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com> writes:
>
>   
>> Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>     
>>> Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com> writes:
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>>>>> No the crashdump mechanism is useless because user space is already
>>>>> broken and unusable.
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> Again, why broken?
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> To get a stock stat drive by hand I had to list about 5 kernel modules
>>> in the right magic order in /etc/kdump.conf
>>>
>>> Neither mount by label or mount by uuid when specified in /etc/kdump.conf
>>> I had to hack mkdumprd to get an initrd that even finds the proper disk
>>> to mount.
>>>   
>>>       
>> You are saying that there is some difficulty to make a initrd for kdump, but I
>> am sorry that I can't see any relations between this and my patch. What is your
>> point here?
>>     
>
> You are trying to make it easier for end users.
>
> I am saying the problem is in user space.
>
> I am saying also that the kernel doesn't have a clue what you are
> going to load with kexec on panic to handle panics.  Maybe it is a
> custom stand alone binary that only needs 5K.  So the kernel doesn't
> have a clue what the right size to reserve.
>   

So what? If you have 8G memory, would you mind 128M-5K memory to be wasted?

The kernel doesn't have to reserve the exact amount of memory that a 
kexec kernel will use, it just finds a big enough size for all cases 
which already assumes the physical memory is large enough.
> I think if what you were proposing was part of some coherent story for
> a complete implementation I would consider it more.  Instead this just
> appears to be a reaction to how frustrating the user space
> implementation is, and fixing things in the kernel instead of in user
> space.
>   

Yes, exactly, in fact I am doing another part which will allow us to 
take back of the reserved memory at run-time.



  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-06  6:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 99+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-08-05 11:19 [Patch 0/7] Implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:19 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:19 ` [Patch 1/7] x86: add CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:19   ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 13:41   ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 13:41     ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 14:45   ` Andi Kleen
2009-08-05 14:45     ` Andi Kleen
2009-08-05 20:07     ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-05 20:07       ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  1:55     ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  1:55       ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  7:15       ` Andi Kleen
2009-08-06  7:15         ` Andi Kleen
2009-08-06  7:44         ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  7:44           ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  7:56         ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  7:56           ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:19 ` [Patch 2/7] x86: implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:19   ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 13:43   ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 13:43     ` Neil Horman
2009-08-06  1:45     ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  1:45       ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 22:51   ` Yu, Fenghua
2009-08-05 22:51     ` Yu, Fenghua
2009-08-06  1:56     ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  1:56       ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:19 ` [Patch 3/7] ia64: add CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:19   ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 13:49   ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 13:49     ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 11:19 ` [Patch 4/7] ia64: implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:19   ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 13:46   ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 13:46     ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 11:19 ` [Patch 5/7] powerpc: add CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:19   ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 13:49   ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 13:49     ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 11:20 ` [Patch 6/7] powerpc: implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:20   ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 13:50   ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 13:50     ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 11:20 ` [Patch 7/7] doc: update the kdump document Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 11:20   ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-05 13:33 ` [Patch 0/7] Implement crashkernel=auto Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-05 13:33   ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-05 14:04   ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 14:04     ` Neil Horman
2009-08-05 22:57     ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-05 22:57       ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  2:05       ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  2:05         ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  2:47         ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  2:47           ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  3:39           ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  3:39             ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  3:51             ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  3:51               ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  5:57               ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  5:57                 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  6:14                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  6:14                   ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  6:37                   ` Amerigo Wang [this message]
2009-08-06  6:37                     ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  8:35                     ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  8:35                       ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  8:47                       ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  8:47                         ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-06  9:04                         ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  9:04                           ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-07 19:13                         ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-07 19:13                           ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-06  9:11                       ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  9:11                         ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-07 19:50                         ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-07 19:50                           ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-07 19:50                           ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-07 21:03                           ` Andi Kleen
2009-08-07 21:03                             ` Andi Kleen
2009-08-07 21:03                             ` Andi Kleen
2009-08-07 21:26                             ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-07 21:26                               ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-07 21:26                               ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-07 22:06                             ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-07 22:06                               ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-07 22:06                               ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-07 21:31                           ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-07 21:31                             ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-07 21:31                             ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-07 22:16                             ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-07 22:16                               ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-07 22:16                               ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-10  3:11                           ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-10  3:11                             ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-10  3:11                             ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  1:39   ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-06  1:39     ` Amerigo Wang

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=4A7A7A0F.6070906@redhat.com \
    --to=amwang@redhat.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=avorontsov@ru.mvista.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=nhorman@redhat.com \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.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.