From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
yinghai@kernel.org, vgoyal@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Cleanup kdump memmap= passing and e820 usage
Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 12:25:14 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87txpmv9hx.fsf@xmission.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1855338.FfngI2qLCK@skinner.arch.suse.de> (Thomas Renninger's message of "Fri, 08 Feb 2013 21:08:39 +0100")
Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de> writes:
> On Wednesday, February 06, 2013 03:39:50 PM Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com> writes:
>> >> The existing e820 handling for unknown type is much much better. It
>> >> just treats them as reserved and goes about it's merry way.
> If the new kdump type is treated as reserved and things work out,
> I agree that this would be the most elegant approach, especially also
> for backporting etc.
Only kexec-tools needs the functionality so no kernel level backporting
is necessary.
> In a kernel which has the patch/functionality backported I would do
> it like this then:
> - If the special kdump e820 type shows up, all memmap options from
> memmap=exactmap on are ignored and the kexec-tools passed
> e820 table is used just as it is.
> -> This would still allow e820 modifcations through memmap=
> if passed manually for debugging, they just have to show up before
> the kexec-tools generated ones. Anyway, I will also send a patch
> how I think this can be backported and still work with old and new
> kexec-tools versions.
Way over complicated. kexec-tools can just stop passing the memmap=
options entirely for every kernel.
We have not actually identified a use that the kernel would make of the
reserved areas. Comming up with a new mapping type is just hedging our
bets in case there is a reason we want to know what is actually RAM at
some point in the future.
>> > It sounds like this is the way to go.
>>
>> It certainly looks good. We still need someone with the time to write
>> the patch and test it.
>
> I try to find time for this early next week to code something together and
> already give it some testing, but I cannot promise anything.
>
> Thanks everybody for the help to find the best solution,
Eric
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-08 20:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-22 15:02 [PATCH 0/3] Make use of new memmap= kernel parameter syntax Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 15:02 ` [PATCH 1/3] kexec: Split kernel_version() to also be able to pass a release string Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 15:02 ` [PATCH 2/3] kexec x86: Extract kernel version and convert it to KERNEL_VERSION() style Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 15:02 ` [PATCH 3/3] kexec x86: Make kexec aware of new memmap= kernel parameter possibilities Thomas Renninger
2013-01-30 4:31 ` [PATCH 0/3] Make use of new memmap= kernel parameter syntax Simon Horman
2013-01-30 5:40 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 5:52 ` Simon Horman
2013-01-30 16:03 ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-30 16:06 ` [PATCH 1/3] x86 e820: Check for exactmap appearance when parsing first memmap option Thomas Renninger
2013-01-30 16:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 16:08 ` [PATCH 2/3] x86: Introduce Linux kernel specific E820_RESERVED_KDUMP e820 memory range type Thomas Renninger
2013-01-30 16:10 ` [PATCH 3/3] x86 e820: Introduce memmap=kdump_reserve_usable for kdump usage Thomas Renninger
2013-01-30 16:10 ` [PATCH 0/3] Make use of new memmap= kernel parameter syntax H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 16:13 ` [PATCH 0/3] Cleanup kdump memmap= passing and e820 usage Thomas Renninger
2013-01-30 16:16 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 16:39 ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-30 16:52 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 17:41 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-30 18:52 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-01-30 21:38 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 21:57 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-01-30 22:10 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 22:29 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-01-30 22:41 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-30 22:49 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-31 0:15 ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-31 0:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-31 9:11 ` Thomas Renninger
2013-02-06 15:23 ` Thomas Renninger
2013-02-06 23:04 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-02-06 23:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-02-06 23:39 ` Eric W. Biederman
2013-02-08 20:08 ` Thomas Renninger
2013-02-08 20:25 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2013-02-08 20:56 ` Thomas Renninger
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=87txpmv9hx.fsf@xmission.com \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=trenn@suse.de \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox