From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Cc: Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>,
x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kexec@lists.infradead.org, vgoyal@redhat.com, horms@verge.net.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86 e820: Introduce memmap=resetusablemap for kdump usage
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:11:59 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51072FEF.50000@zytor.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAE9FiQWDcFR+6L-GiR6rk60TC0zH=xewyH_h1Rx_QB+8PTiU3Q@mail.gmail.com>
On 01/28/2013 06:10 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>
> kexec-tools will change that to E820_KDUMP_RESERVED (or other good name).
>
> We only need to update kernel to get old max_pfn by
> checking E820_KDUMP_RESERVED.
>
OK, I have asked this before, but I still have not gotten any acceptable
answer:
Why do we still have max_*_pfn at all? Shouldn't it all be based on
memblocks by now?
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-01-29 2:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-01-22 15:20 [PATCH 0/2] Only parse exactmap once, introduce memmap=resetusablemap Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 15:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86 e820: Check for exactmap appearance when parsing first memmap option Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 19:33 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29 1:09 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29 2:01 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-22 15:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86 e820: Introduce memmap=resetusablemap for kdump usage Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 15:54 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-22 16:23 ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-22 16:32 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-22 20:06 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-24 4:07 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29 1:05 ` Thomas Renninger
2013-01-29 1:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29 2:10 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29 2:11 ` H. Peter Anvin [this message]
2013-01-29 2:19 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29 2:20 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29 2:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29 2:31 ` Yinghai Lu
2013-01-29 3:33 ` H. Peter Anvin
2013-01-29 9:47 ` Thomas Renninger
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=51072FEF.50000@zytor.com \
--to=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trenn@suse.de \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yinghai@kernel.org \
/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