linux-kernel - Re: [Patch 0/8] V3 Implement crashkernel=auto

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090812124659.GA4808@mail1.bwalle.de>
Date:	Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:46:59 +0200
From:	Bernhard Walle <bernhard.walle@....de>
To:	Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tony.luck@...el.com,
	linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch 0/8] V3 Implement crashkernel=auto

* Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com> [2009-08-12 10:15]:
> 
> This series of patch implements automatically reserved memory for crashkernel,
> by introducing a new boot option "crashkernel=auto". This idea is from Neil.

Honestly I don't see why everything is guarded by
CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE. We do we need that new configuration
option? I mean, if I don't specify 'crashkernel=auto', then the patch
does nothing, right? Then the option CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE would
only be needed so save some bytes of code. Is that really worth it?


Regards,
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/