[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5164790E.7@zytor.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 2013 13:24:46 -0700
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
CC: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, WANG Chao <chaowang@...hat.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/4] x86, kdump: Change crashkernel_high/low= to crashkernel=;high/low
On 04/09/2013 01:05 PM, Yinghai Lu wrote:
>>
>> So crashkernel=X@Y;high is a valid syntax? Looks like we will reserve
>> X amount of RAM at base Y and ignore "high" or "low".
>
> yes, we should reject them.
>
What if there isn't X amount of RAM available at base Y?
-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