From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 10:49:24 +0000 Subject: Re: [Patch 0/8] V3 Implement crashkernel=auto Message-Id: List-Id: References: <20090812081731.5757.25254.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20090812124659.GA4808@mail1.bwalle.de> <4A837F49.9060003@redhat.com> <20090813053952.GA9037@mail1.bwalle.de> <4A83CCAA.1030302@redhat.com> <20090813090335.GA9502@mail1.bwalle.de> In-Reply-To: <20090813090335.GA9502@mail1.bwalle.de> (Bernhard Walle's message of "Thu\, 13 Aug 2009 11\:03\:35 +0200") MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Bernhard Walle Cc: Amerigo Wang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Neil Horman , Andi Kleen , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Fenghua Yu , Ingo Molnar , Anton Vorontsov Bernhard Walle writes: > * Amerigo Wang [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. Eric From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754197AbZHMKtc (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Aug 2009 06:49:32 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754160AbZHMKtb (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Aug 2009 06:49:31 -0400 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:49835 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753435AbZHMKta (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Aug 2009 06:49:30 -0400 To: Bernhard Walle Cc: Amerigo Wang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Neil Horman , Andi Kleen , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Fenghua Yu , Ingo Molnar , Anton Vorontsov References: <20090812081731.5757.25254.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20090812124659.GA4808@mail1.bwalle.de> <4A837F49.9060003@redhat.com> <20090813053952.GA9037@mail1.bwalle.de> <4A83CCAA.1030302@redhat.com> <20090813090335.GA9502@mail1.bwalle.de> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:49:24 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20090813090335.GA9502@mail1.bwalle.de> (Bernhard Walle's message of "Thu\, 13 Aug 2009 11\:03\:35 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in02.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=76.21.114.89;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 76.21.114.89 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: bernhard.walle@gmx.de, avorontsov@ru.mvista.com, mingo@elte.hu, fenghua.yu@intel.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, andi@firstfloor.org, nhorman@redhat.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amwang@redhat.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-Spam-DCC: XMission; sa01 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1 X-Spam-Combo: ;Bernhard Walle X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Report: * -1.8 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP * 1.5 XMNoVowels Alpha-numberic number with no vowels * 0.0 T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG BODY: T_TM2_M_HEADER_IN_MSG * -2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * -0.0 DCC_CHECK_NEGATIVE Not listed in DCC * [sa01 1397; Body=1 Fuz1=1 Fuz2=1] * 0.0 T_TooManySym_01 4+ unique symbols in subject * 0.0 XM_SPF_Neutral SPF-Neutral * 0.4 UNTRUSTED_Relay Comes from a non-trusted relay Subject: Re: [Patch 0/8] V3 Implement crashkernel=auto X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 25 Oct 2007 00:26:12 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on in02.mta.xmission.com) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Bernhard Walle writes: > * Amerigo Wang [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. Eric