public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "M. Mohan Kumar" <mohan@in.ibm.com>
To: Amerigo Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tony.luck@intel.com,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@redhat.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, bernhard.walle@gmx.de,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch 6/8] powerpc: add CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:54:22 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090825102422.GA14591@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A938698.40302@redhat.com>

On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 02:37:12PM +0800, Amerigo Wang wrote:
> M. Mohan Kumar wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:44:03PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>>   
>>> On Fri, 2009-08-21 at 02:55 -0400, Amerigo Wang wrote:
>>>     
     
>>> That aside, I don't see how this will be useful in practice, if it only
>>> works for memory sizes over 4G? Or are we saying that people with less
>>> than 4G don't need crash kernels? If we're not saying that, those users,
>>> or those users' distros, still need to do some logic to work out if they
>>> have < 4GB of memory and if so pick a crash kernel size. So why can't
>>> they pick the size in the > 4GB case also?
>>>     
>>
>> True, I wanted to test the patch and when tested on a ppc64 machine which
>> has RAM less than 4GB, I have to modify arch_default_crash_size routine to
>> return 256MB (I didn't have a PPC64 machine with more than 4GB RAM handy).
>> So its better to consider machines with less than 4GB RAM also.
>>   
>
> OK, how about 2G on ppc? Is it safe to reserve 256M when I have 2G?

I would prefer 2G-4G 128MB.

>
>> PPC64 crashkernel base is always 32MB. So at least ppc64 code should have
>> its own arch_default_crash_base to return 32MB to avoid the kernel warning
>> message "Crash kernel location must be 0x2000000"
>>   
> Hmm, good point, how about KDUMP_KERNELBASE? It looks fine for both ppc  
> and ppc64.

Yes, you can use KDUMP_KERNELBASE for arch_default_crash_base

Regards,
M. Mohan Kumar

  reply	other threads:[~2009-08-25 10:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-08-21  6:54 [Patch 0/8] V4 Implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21  6:54 ` [Patch 1/8] kexec: allow to shrink reserved memory Amerigo Wang
2009-08-22  0:17   ` Andrew Morton
2009-08-24  1:36     ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-22  1:39   ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-08-24  2:02     ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21  6:54 ` [Patch 2/8] x86: add CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21  6:54 ` [Patch 3/8] x86: implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21  6:54 ` [Patch 4/8] ia64: add CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21  6:55 ` [Patch 5/8] ia64: implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-22  0:24   ` Andrew Morton
2009-08-22 11:18     ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-24  2:05       ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-24  7:43         ` Ingo Molnar
2009-08-24  8:21           ` Bernhard Walle
2009-08-24 10:23             ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-24  1:59     ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21  6:55 ` [Patch 6/8] powerpc: add CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE Amerigo Wang
2009-08-24 13:44   ` Michael Ellerman
2009-08-24 14:45     ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-08-25  6:37       ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-25 10:24         ` M. Mohan Kumar [this message]
2009-08-25  6:23     ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-25 10:28       ` M. Mohan Kumar
2009-08-26  6:59         ` Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21  6:55 ` [Patch 7/8] powerpc: implement crashkernel=auto Amerigo Wang
2009-08-21  6:55 ` [Patch 8/8] doc: update the kdump document Amerigo Wang
2009-08-22  0:06 ` [Patch 0/8] V4 Implement crashkernel=auto Andrew Morton
2009-08-24  1:34   ` Amerigo Wang

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=20090825102422.GA14591@in.ibm.com \
    --to=mohan@in.ibm.com \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=amwang@redhat.com \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=avorontsov@ru.mvista.com \
    --cc=bernhard.walle@gmx.de \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=kamezawa.hiroyu@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=michael@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=nhorman@redhat.com \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.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