From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/12] kexec: allow architectures to override boot mapping Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 09:22:42 +0100 Message-ID: <20160512082242.GQ19428@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20160428092644.GX19428@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20160512062627.GB2711@x1.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160512062627.GB2711@x1.redhat.com> Sender: linux-ia64-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Baoquan He , Eric Biederman Cc: Mark Rutland , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Ian Campbell , Tony Luck , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Pawel Moll , linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Corbet , kexec@lists.infradead.org, Fenghua Yu , Vivek Goyal , Haren Myneni , Rob Herring , Santosh Shilimkar , Kumar Gala , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 02:26:27PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > On 04/28/16 at 10:28am, Russell King wrote: > > diff --git a/include/linux/kexec.h b/include/linux/kexec.h > > index 52a3a221bcb2..99cb9dac7909 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/kexec.h > > +++ b/include/linux/kexec.h > > @@ -318,6 +318,44 @@ int __weak arch_kexec_apply_relocations_add(const Elf_Ehdr *ehdr, > > int __weak arch_kexec_apply_relocations(const Elf_Ehdr *ehdr, Elf_Shdr *sechdrs, > > unsigned int relsec); > > > > +#ifndef page_to_boot_pfn > > +static inline unsigned long page_to_boot_pfn(struct page *page) > > +{ > > + return page_to_pfn(page); > > +} > > +#endif > > I am thinking if it's appropriate to introduce a new concept which only > exists in a certain system of a certain ARCH. Is it unavoidable? If have > to can we name it as kexec_page_to_pfn/kexec_pfn_to_page, etc? People > might not need to know about boot view physical address and kernel view > physical address things when they just want to understand kexec > implementation related to one ARCH except of ARM, even related to ARM > but not Keystone 2. Well, what do you suggest we do instead? Eric, please get involved in this discussion, as this was your idea. -- RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net.