From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from kirsty.vergenet.net (kirsty.vergenet.net [202.4.237.240]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35060DE0C8 for ; Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:26:43 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:26:41 +1000 From: Simon Horman To: Vivek Goyal Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] Move elfcorehdr_addr out of vmcore.c (Was: Re: [patch] crashdump: fix undefined reference to `elfcorehdr_addr') Message-ID: <20080729032639.GA4356@verge.net.au> References: <20080727234529.GM6175@verge.net.au> <20080728015117.GA12055@verge.net.au> <20080728024526.GB3334@verge.net.au> <20080728034007.GA30450@verge.net.au> <20080728211025.GA9985@redhat.com> <20080729012245.GI10434@verge.net.au> <20080729022822.GA25975@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20080729022822.GA25975@redhat.com> Cc: Tony Luck , linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Terry Loftin , Paul Mundt , Paul Mackerras , "Eric W. Biederman" , Andrew Morton , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 10:28:22PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > 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 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" > > > > > > 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. I guessed that was why you split them up. But really the per-arch change is very small. > 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). For combiled patch: Acked-by: Simon Horman -- Horms