Re: kexec boot regression

[Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>]

Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> Jens Axboe wrote:
>>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>> Jens Axboe wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Dec 15 2009, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>>>> [PATCH] x86/pci: intel ioh bus num reg accessing fix
>>>>>>
>>>>>> it is above 0x100, so if mmconf is not enable, need to skip it
>>>>> This works, it kexecs kernels fine. But since 2.6.32 doesn't have the
>>>>> mmconf problem to begin with, are we now just working around the issue?
>>>>> SRAT still reports issues, numa doesn't work.
>>>> that patch will be bullet proof... we need it.
>>>>
>>>> also still need to figure out why memmap range is not passed properly.
>>>>
>>>> do you mean 2.6.32 kexec 2.6.32 it have worked mmconf and numa in
>>>> second kernel?
>>> Yes, 2.6.32 booted and 2.6.32 kexec'ed works just fine, no SRAT
>>> complaints and NUMA works fine.
>> do you need 
>> memmap=62G@4G
>> in this case?
> 
> Yes, I've needed that always.

good,

can you enable debug option in kexec to see why kexec can not pass whole 38? range to second kernel?

YH