From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [203.10.76.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.ozlabs.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (verified OK)) by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3E235B6EDF for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 12:37:03 +1000 (EST) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3842CDDD01 for ; Mon, 24 Aug 2009 12:37:01 +1000 (EST) Message-ID: <4A91EE3D.7050805@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 09:34:53 +0800 From: Amerigo Wang MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [Patch 0/8] V4 Implement crashkernel=auto References: <20090821065637.4855.32234.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20090821170615.1ea4a4f4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20090821170615.1ea4a4f4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: fenghua.yu@intel.com, nhorman@redhat.com, tony.luck@intel.com, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, andi@firstfloor.org, ebiederm@xmission.com, mingo@elte.hu, bernhard.walle@gmx.de, kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Andrew Morton wrote: > (cc linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org) > > On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 02:54:12 -0400 > Amerigo Wang wrote: > > >> This series of patch implements automatically reserved memory for crashkernel, >> by introducing a new boot option "crashkernel=auto". This idea is from Neil. >> >> In case of breaking user-space applications, it modifies this boot option after >> it decides how much memory should be reserved. >> >> On different arch, the threshold and reserved memory size is different. Please >> refer patch 8/8 which contains an update for the documentation. >> >> Patch 1/8 implements shrinking reserved memory at run-time, which is useful >> when more than enough memory is reserved automatically. >> >> Note: This patchset was only tested on x86_64 with differernt memory sizes. >> > > > I'd prefer that this change had been runtime tested on ia64 and powerpc > and has had some quality review from relevant developers of those > architectures. > > Looking at the cc's, I'm not sure that the powerpc guys even know about > this work? > > Ok, let me try to find some ppc and ia64 machines in the company.. ;)