[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D0A3E31.4000109@zytor.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:28:33 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
CC: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Maxim Uvarov <muvarov@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: kdump broken on 2.6.37-rc4
On 12/16/2010 06:39 AM, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 08:29:01PM -0800, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>> please check
>>
>> [PATCH] x86, crashkernel, 32bit: only try to get range under 512M
>>
>> Steanishlaw report kdump is 32bit is broken.
>>
>> in misc.c for decompresser, it will do sanity checking to make sure heap
>> heap under 512M.
>
> Thanks Yinghai. I am wondering why on 32bit heap has to be with-in 512MB.
> I think you are referring to following check in
> arch/x86/boot/compressed/misc.c.
>
> if (end > ((-__PAGE_OFFSET-(512 <<20)-1) & 0x7fffffff))
> error("Destination address too large");
>
> It was introduced here.
>
> commit 968de4f02621db35b8ae5239c8cfc6664fb872d8
> Author: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
> Date: Thu Dec 7 02:14:04 2006 +0100
>
> [PATCH] i386: Relocatable kernel support
>
> Eric,
>
> It has been long. By any chance would you remember where does above
> constraint come from?
>
It might, in fact, be bogus; specifically a proxy for the fact that we
need the kernel memory including bss and brk below the lowmem boundary,
which isn't well-defined.
-hpa
--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.
--
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