[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130311192021.GF12107@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:20:21 -0400
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
WANG Chao <chaowang@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, kdump: Set crashkernel_low automatically
On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 12:06:06PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote:
[..]
> > I actually disagree with trying low memory at all. Push kdump as high
> > into the memory range as we can go, if there is a performance penalty it
> > is much better to take it in the kdump kernel.
>
> Agreed, It's better let 64 bit all use one code path.
> And we can find more bugs while load them all high.
> otherwise it would be hard to fix them if the bugs only happens on systems
> that have bunch of dimms.
I find it odd that if a user wants to load a 32bit kernel or use 32bit
entry point then he needs to first reboot the kernel and re-reserve
the memory.
At installation time, one does not necessarily know what kind of kernel
will be used for crashdump. So reserving as high as possible limits
the choices.
I would rather prefer that user opt in for higher addresses instead of
these being reserved by default.
Thanks
Vivek
--
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