[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CA129EB.5000309@zytor.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 16:34:03 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
CC: caiqian@...hat.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
kexec <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: kexec load failure introduced by "x86, memblock: Replace e820_/_early
string with memblock_"
On 09/27/2010 04:32 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
> On 09/27/2010 04:26 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> On 09/27/2010 04:20 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>>
>>> x86 own version for find_area?
>>>
>>
>> No, double no.
>>
>> Same kind of crap: overloading an interface with semantics it shouldn't
>> have. The right thing is to introduce a new interface with carries the
>> explicitly needed policy with it... e.g. memblock_find_in_range_lowest().
>>
>> That interface would have the explicit semantics of returning the lowest
>> possible address, as opposed to any suitable address (which may change
>> if policy requirements change.)
>>
>> The other question is why does kexec need this in the first place? Is
>> this due to a design bug in kexec or is there some fundamental reason
>> for this?
>
> bzImage is used here. so need range below 4g.
>
OK, so why don't you cap the range to 4 GiB and then pass that down to
the existing interface? That's different from "lowest possible address".
-hpa
--
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