From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([207.211.31.120] helo=us-smtp-1.mimecast.com) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1jqXSc-00013M-Fy for kexec@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 07:47:15 +0000 Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 15:46:59 +0800 From: Dave Young Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] kexec_file: allow archs to handle special regions while locating memory hole Message-ID: <20200701074659.GA3878@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> References: <159319825403.16351.7253978047621755765.stgit@hbathini.in.ibm.com> <159319828304.16351.6990340111766605842.stgit@hbathini.in.ibm.com> <20200629133933.0787f562@ezekiel.suse.cz> <7981ae61-26c6-000c-9ee4-382dab3eecab@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7981ae61-26c6-000c-9ee4-382dab3eecab@linux.ibm.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "kexec" Errors-To: kexec-bounces+dwmw2=infradead.org@lists.infradead.org To: Hari Bathini Cc: Pingfan Liu , Petr Tesarik , Kexec-ml , Mahesh J Salgaonkar , Mimi Zohar , lkml , linuxppc-dev , Sourabh Jain , Vivek Goyal , Andrew Morton , Thiago Jung Bauermann , Eric Biederman On 06/29/20 at 05:26pm, Hari Bathini wrote: > Hi Petr, > > On 29/06/20 5:09 pm, Petr Tesarik wrote: > > Hi Hari, > > > > is there any good reason to add two more functions with a very similar > > name to an existing function? AFAICS all you need is a way to call a > > PPC64-specific function from within kexec_add_buffer (PATCH 4/11), so > > you could add something like this: > > > > int __weak arch_kexec_locate_mem_hole(struct kexec_buf *kbuf) > > { > > return 0; > > } > > > > Call this function from kexec_add_buffer where appropriate and then > > override it for PPC64 (it roughly corresponds to your > > kexec_locate_mem_hole_ppc64() from PATCH 4/11). > > > > FWIW it would make it easier for me to follow the resulting code. > > Right, Petr. > > I was trying out a few things before I ended up with what I sent here. > Bu yeah.. I did realize arch_kexec_locate_mem_hole() would have been better > after sending out v1. Will take care of that in v2. Another way is use arch private function to locate mem hole, then set kbuf->mem, and then call kexec_add_buf, it will skip the common locate hole function. But other than that I have some confusion about those excluded ranges. Replied a question to patch 4. Thanks Dave _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec