From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755463Ab0I0Xew (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Sep 2010 19:34:52 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:33892 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751127Ab0I0Xev (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Sep 2010 19:34:51 -0400 Message-ID: <4CA129EB.5000309@zytor.com> Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:34:03 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100907 Fedora/3.1.3-1.fc13 Thunderbird/3.1.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Yinghai Lu CC: caiqian@redhat.com, Ingo Molnar , kexec , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: kexec load failure introduced by "x86, memblock: Replace e820_/_early string with memblock_" References: <632974489.2046131285586512527.JavaMail.root@zmail06.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> <4CA11918.7050708@kernel.org> <4CA11FB7.2080101@zytor.com> <4CA126BE.7000609@kernel.org> <4CA1283C.9010105@zytor.com> <4CA12976.5060504@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <4CA12976.5060504@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 09/27/2010 04:32 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: > On 09/27/2010 04:26 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 09/27/2010 04:20 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote: >>> >>> x86 own version for find_area? >>> >> >> No, double no. >> >> Same kind of crap: overloading an interface with semantics it shouldn't >> have. The right thing is to introduce a new interface with carries the >> explicitly needed policy with it... e.g. memblock_find_in_range_lowest(). >> >> That interface would have the explicit semantics of returning the lowest >> possible address, as opposed to any suitable address (which may change >> if policy requirements change.) >> >> The other question is why does kexec need this in the first place? Is >> this due to a design bug in kexec or is there some fundamental reason >> for this? > > bzImage is used here. so need range below 4g. > OK, so why don't you cap the range to 4 GiB and then pass that down to the existing interface? That's different from "lowest possible address". -hpa