[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070911100145.GC31038@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 12:01:45 +0200
From: Bernhard Walle <bwalle@...e.de>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...ibm.com>
Cc: Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, discuss@...-64.org,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [discuss] [patch 3/5] Use extended crashkernel command line on
x86_64
* Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...ibm.com> [2007-09-11 07:14]:
> On Sun, Sep 09, 2007 at 08:52:58PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote:
> > * Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel@...il.com> [2007-09-09 19:27]:
> > > >
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_KEXEC
> > > ...
> > >
> > > CONFIG_KEXEC or CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP?
> >
> > Good question. The crashkernel parameter was CONFIG_KEXEC before, and
> > I also wondered why, but I didn't change this because maybe there's
> > some reason I don't know.
> >
> > Vivek, do you know why this was CONFIG_KEXEC?
>
> As Eric mentioned, CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP has been used for all dump capturing
> infrastructure and rest of the kexec and kexec on panic functionality
> has been put under CONFIG_KEXEC.
>
> Keeping memory reservation under CONFIG_KEXEC helps in a sense when
> somebody is not using a relocatable kernel and uses a custom kernel for dump
> capture. In that case he does not have to enable CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP in the
> first kernel.
Yes, you all are right ... sorry for the noise ;)
Thanks,
Bernhard
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists