From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Date: Tue, 05 Aug 2008 10:14:15 +0000 Subject: Re: kdump, ia64: always reserve elfcore header memory in crash Message-Id: <20080805101411.GA18192@verge.net.au> List-Id: References: <20080805094825.GA9712@verge.net.au> <20080805025442.d4626d40.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20080805025442.d4626d40.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Tony Luck , kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vivek Goyal On Tue, Aug 05, 2008 at 02:54:42AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 5 Aug 2008 19:48:27 +1000 Simon Horman wrote: > > > elfcore header memory needs to be reserved in a crash kernel. > > This means that the relevant code should be protected > > by CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP rather than CONFIG_PROC_VMCORE. > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Horman > > > > --- > > Andrew, this patch fixes bug in the (unlikely) case where > > an ia64 crashdump kernel does not have CONFIG_PROC_FS set. > > I think it is worth including in 2.6.27. But breakage cases are > > likely to be minimal to non-existent, so I am comfortable > > with post 2.6.27 too. > > > > This patch should be appended to the series, > > "is_kdump_kernel() cleanup and related patches". > > hm, that means that we would need to apply a moderate-size seven patch > series to fix one little bug. > > I think that if we want to fix this in 2.6.27 then the basic single > patch would be preferable. Or we leave it until 2.6.28/ I think it would be better to wait until 2.6.28 than mess around with a minimal and then a proper fix. I doubt that anyone is hitting this.