linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86, kdump: crashkernel=X try to reserve below 896M first, then try below 4G, then MAXMEM

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAE9FiQW=WLvBKgdWkKNaka=ZC1FLxYAtXc2W2zqNEKhHR2VSNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 24 Oct 2013 12:13:41 -0700
From:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
To:	WANG Chao <chaowang@...hat.com>
Cc:	Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	Jacob Shin <jacob.shin@....com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
	"kexec@...ts.infradead.org" <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, kdump: crashkernel=X try to reserve below 896M
 first, then try below 4G, then MAXMEM

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:01 AM, WANG Chao <chaowang@...hat.com> wrote:

>
> I think crashkernel=XM,high is really supposed to be used when user indeed
> want to reserve from high.

No. Keep the all 64bit to stay high, make thing simple.
instead of some low and some use high.

>
> Like Vivek said, failing at different point shouldn't be a problem.
> That's an incorrect configuration. When crashkernel=1G,high, old
> kexec-tools still fails the same way. That could cause confusion, in
> your word.

If it would fail later, we should let it fail early as possible.

>
> Let me put it in an example, a user want to utilize this new kernel
> feature to reserve 1G for crash kernel but not upgrade kexec-tools,
>
> - W/o this patch:
>  First he would try crashkernel=1G, but failed to reserve. Second time,
>  he goes with crashkernel=1G,high, reservation is fine but kexec fails
>  to load. Upgrading kexec-tools is essential to him.
>
> - W/ this patch:
>   First he would try crashkernel=1G, reservation is ok but kexec fails
>   to load the same way as the case of crashkernel=1G,high. Upgrading
>   kexec-tools is essential to him.
>
> The point is old kexec-tools can't load high, no matter by what kind of
> crashkernel cmdline to reserve at high.

old kexec-tools could work cross 892M in some case.
That will confuse the user, as it works some time on some setup, but does
not work on other setup.

Thanks

Yinghai
--
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/