Re: [PATCH 1/5] Move elfcorehdr_addr out of vmcore.c (Was: Re:

Vivek Goyal
2008-07-29T02:28:22Z

On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 11:22:48AM +1000, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 03:47:41PM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> > Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> writes:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > How does following series of patches look like. I have moved
> > > elfcorehdr_addr out of vmcore.c and pushed it to arch dependent section
> > > of crash dump to make sure that it can be worked with even when
> > > CONFIG_PROC_VMCORE is disabled and CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP is enabled.
> > >
> > > I tested it on x86_64. Compile tested it on i386 and ppc64. ia64 and
> > > sh versions are completely untested.
> >
> > Given the current state of the code:
> > Acked-by: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
> >
> > To process a kernel crash dump we pass the kernel elfcorehdr option,
> > so testing to see if it was passed seems reasonable.
> >
> > In general I think this method of handling the problems with kdump is
> > too brittle to live, but in the case of iommus we certainly need to do
> > something different, and unfortunately iommus were not common on x86
> > when the original code was merged so we have not handled them well.
>
> Agreed, however these patches look like they really ought to be merged
> into a single patch for the sake of bisect. As things stand, applying
> the first patch will break the build on each architecture with an
> architecture specific until the latter is applied.

That's a good point. I was not very sure because changes were in
different arches and I broke the patch. At the same time changes are
really miniscule in each arch.

So, for the sake of not breaking compilation for git-bisect, I will
generate a single patch tomorrow. (Until and unless somebody has an
objection).

Thanks
Vivek

>
> --
> Horms