From: Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Bernhard Walle <bernhard.walle@gmx.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch 0/8] V3 Implement crashkernel=auto
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 02:59:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A84D2FD.1030909@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1k5182dl7.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Bernhard Walle <bernhard.walle@gmx.de> writes:
>
>
>> * Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com> [2009-08-13 10:19]:
>>
>>> Sure.
>>>
>>> But if we disable CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE, that means
>>> crashkernel=auto will be invalid, this is the same as it is now.
>>>
>> Ok, but since 'crashkernel=auto' is not used today, nobody has
>> 'crashkernel=auto' in the bootloader configuration. So I don't see any
>> practial advantage of that config option.
>>
>> Eric, what's your opinion on that, do we need a config option
>> CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE or could we just implement that feature
>> unconditionally (if CONFIG_KEXEC is enabled, of course).
>>
>
> The only reason I can see the option going away would be
> a dependency on CONFIG_HOTPLUG_MEM.
>
I am not sure if I understand you correctly, but it doesn't and won't
depend on CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG.
Thanks.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: Bernhard Walle <bernhard.walle@gmx.de>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com,
linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch 0/8] V3 Implement crashkernel=auto
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 10:59:09 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A84D2FD.1030909@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m1k5182dl7.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Bernhard Walle <bernhard.walle@gmx.de> writes:
>
>
>> * Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com> [2009-08-13 10:19]:
>>
>>> Sure.
>>>
>>> But if we disable CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE, that means
>>> crashkernel=auto will be invalid, this is the same as it is now.
>>>
>> Ok, but since 'crashkernel=auto' is not used today, nobody has
>> 'crashkernel=auto' in the bootloader configuration. So I don't see any
>> practial advantage of that config option.
>>
>> Eric, what's your opinion on that, do we need a config option
>> CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE or could we just implement that feature
>> unconditionally (if CONFIG_KEXEC is enabled, of course).
>>
>
> The only reason I can see the option going away would be
> a dependency on CONFIG_HOTPLUG_MEM.
>
I am not sure if I understand you correctly, but it doesn't and won't
depend on CONFIG_MEMORY_HOTPLUG.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-14 2:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 91+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-08-12 8:15 [Patch 0/8] V3 Implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:15 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:15 ` [Patch 1/8] x86: add CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:15 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:15 ` [Patch 2/8] x86: implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:15 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:15 ` [Patch 3/8] ia64: add CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:15 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:15 ` [Patch 4/8] ia64: implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:15 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:16 ` [Patch 5/8] powerpc: add CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:16 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:16 ` [Patch 6/8] powerpc: implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:16 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:16 ` [Patch 7/8] doc: update the kdump document Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:16 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:16 ` [Patch 8/8] kexec: allow to shrink reserved memory Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 8:16 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-13 3:11 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-13 3:11 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-13 3:32 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-13 3:32 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-13 3:32 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-13 6:18 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-13 6:18 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-13 6:18 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-13 8:23 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-13 8:23 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-13 8:23 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-14 22:17 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-14 22:17 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-14 22:17 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-17 9:50 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-17 9:50 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-17 9:50 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-18 0:29 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-18 0:29 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-18 0:29 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-18 6:31 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-18 6:31 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-18 6:31 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-18 8:25 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-18 8:25 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-18 8:25 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-18 8:51 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-18 8:51 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-18 8:51 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-18 10:35 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-18 10:35 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-18 10:35 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-18 23:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-18 23:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-18 23:57 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-19 2:41 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-19 2:41 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-19 2:41 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-19 8:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-19 8:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-19 8:13 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-19 10:47 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-19 10:47 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-19 10:47 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-20 9:15 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-20 9:15 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-20 9:15 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21 0:34 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-21 0:34 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-21 0:34 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-21 1:59 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21 1:59 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21 1:59 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21 2:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-21 2:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-21 2:03 ` KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
2009-08-21 2:47 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21 2:47 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21 2:47 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-12 12:46 ` [Patch 0/8] V3 Implement crashkernel=auto Bernhard Walle
2009-08-12 12:46 ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-13 2:49 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-13 2:49 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-13 5:39 ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-13 5:39 ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-13 8:19 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-13 8:19 ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-13 9:03 ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-13 9:03 ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-13 10:49 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-13 10:49 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-14 2:59 ` Amerigo Wang [this message]
2009-08-14 2:59 ` 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=4A84D2FD.1030909@redhat.com \
--to=amwang@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=avorontsov@ru.mvista.com \
--cc=bernhard.walle@gmx.de \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.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.