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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 07:39:52 +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 Hi, * Amerigo Wang <amwang@...hat.com> [2009-08-13 04:49]: > Bernhard Walle wrote: > > > >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? > > Hi, CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE is not for saving bytes, it just > provides a choice for the user to decide to enable it or not. Still, I don't understand it. When I don't say "crashkernel=auto" on command line, then nothing is done, right? So the choice for the user is the "crashkernel=auto". Why do we need CONFIG_KEXEC_AUTO_RESERVE then? Maybe I just missed something in my logic ... 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists