From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, nhorman@redhat.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] kexec: increase max of kexec segments and use dynamic allocation
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 00:08:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m1iq482duy.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C47E7C9.60608@redhat.com> (Cong Wang's message of "Thu\, 22 Jul 2010 14\:40\:09 +0800")
Cong Wang <amwang@redhat.com> writes:
> On 07/22/10 14:28, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Amerigo Wang<amwang@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>>> Currently KEXEC_SEGMENT_MAX is only 16 which is too small for machine with
>>> many memory ranges. Increase this hard limit to 1024 which is reasonably large,
>>> and change ->segment from a static array to a dynamically allocated memory.
>>
>> ???
>>
>> This should be about segments in the executable being loaded. What
>> executable has one segment for each range of physical memory?
>>
>> Not that generalizing this is a bad idea but with a comment that
>> seems entirely wrong I am wondering what the problem really is.
>>
>
> Ah, I think Neil should explain this.
>
> He made a patch which includes many memory ranges, caused kexec
> fails to load the kernel. Increasing this limit and the corresponding
> one in kexec-tools fixes the problem. His patch is not in upstream
> kexec-tools, AFAIK.
>
> However, even if we don't consider that patch, isn't 16 too small too?
Generally you just need one physical hunk for the code, maybe a second
for the initrd.
It is perfectly fine to raise the number of segments as it doesn't
affect the ABI, but it wants a good explanation of what kind of weird
application wants to write to all over memory when it is loaded.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-22 7:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-22 6:13 [Patch] kexec: increase max of kexec segments and use dynamic allocation Amerigo Wang
2010-07-22 6:28 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-07-22 6:40 ` Cong Wang
2010-07-22 7:08 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2010-07-23 2:57 ` huang ying
2010-07-25 2:54 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-07-26 10:11 ` Cong Wang
2010-07-26 12:19 ` Eric W. Biederman
2010-07-27 8:14 ` Cong 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=m1iq482duy.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=amwang@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nhorman@redhat.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