From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-vx0-f170.google.com (mail-vx0-f170.google.com
	[209.85.220.170]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
	Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK))
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F3A4B6EF0
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 01:21:26 +1100 (EST)
Received: by vxb39 with SMTP id 39so663904vxb.15
	for <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>; Wed, 09 Mar 2011 06:21:23 -0800 (PST)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 22:21:08 +0800
From: =?utf-8?Q?Am=C3=A9rico?= Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
To: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] kdump: Allow shrinking of kdump region to be
	overridden
Message-ID: <20110309142108.GD16951@cr0.redhat.com>
References: <20100825002258.GD28360@kryten> <m139u37cii.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
	<4D771EE6.5050404@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
	<20110309122046.GC16951@cr0.redhat.com>
	<20110309234657.264d3080@kryten>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <20110309234657.264d3080@kryten>
Cc: Mahesh Jagannath Salgaonkar <mahesh@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	=?utf-8?Q?Am=C3=A9rico?= Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 11:46:57PM +1100, Anton Blanchard wrote:
>
>Hi,
>
>> The crashkernel region is specified via kernel cmdline, so why
>> not just drop a failure when it overlaps with RMO region?
>> Am I missing something?
>
>Unfortunately a ppc64 kernel requires a chunk of RMO memory. We would
>need the ability to specify multiple crashkernel regions - about 32MB
>in the RMO and the rest can be anywhere. That sounds pretty fragile for
>a user to configure successfully on the cmdline.
>
>Thats why the ppc64 crashkernel region begins mid way through the RMO
>region. It means both kernels get a chunk of RMO and we only have to
>deal with one crashkernel reservation in all the tools and
>documentation.
>

So, when I specify 128M in cmdline, 32M of them are RMO, and the
rest 96M are normal memory? And when I want to free all of them,
actually the 32M RMO will never be freed?