public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@in.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, ak@suse.de
Subject: Re: [patch 0/2] Protect crashkernel against BSS overlap
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 18:28:06 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071016162806.GB16521@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071016054956.GA4659@in.ibm.com>

* Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@in.ibm.com> [2007-10-16 07:49]:
> 
> Shouldn't bootmem allocator have the functionality to flag an error if
> we try to reserve a memory which is already reserved? I see that bootmem
> allocator is currently printing a warning under CONFIG_DEBUG_BOOTMEM.

That's probably better, yes. See the next version.

> Wouldn't it be better if we reserve the code, data and bss memory also
> using bootmem allocator and when somebody tries to reserve craskernel memory
> and if there is an overlap, boot memory allocator should scream?

It's already marked as reserved. At least on i386 in my test.

> In second patch, you are checking for crash kernel reserved memory being
> beyond _end. That will make sure that there is no overlap with kernel
> text, data or bss. I am wondering then why do we need first patch and
> why should we register bss memory in the resources list. Second patch 
> would make sure that there is no overlap with crash kernel memory and kexec
> will not place any segment outside crashkernel memory.

I think we should also present the BSS to the user like we present
text and data.


Thanks,
   Bernhard

      parent reply	other threads:[~2007-10-16 16:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-15 11:50 [patch 0/2] Protect crashkernel against BSS overlap Bernhard Walle
2007-10-15 11:50 ` [patch 1/2] Add BSS to resource tree Bernhard Walle
2007-10-15 18:32   ` Andrew Morton
2007-10-15 21:24     ` Bernhard Walle
2007-10-15 11:50 ` [patch 2/2] Check if the crashkernel area is behind BSS Bernhard Walle
2007-10-16  5:49 ` [patch 0/2] Protect crashkernel against BSS overlap Vivek Goyal
2007-10-16  9:59   ` Andi Kleen
2007-10-16 16:26     ` Bernhard Walle
2007-10-16 16:28   ` Bernhard Walle [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20071016162806.GB16521@suse.de \
    --to=bwalle@suse.de \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vgoyal@in.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox