[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141203103506.GN3156@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2014 11:35:06 +0100
From: Joerg Roedel <jroedel@...e.de>
To: WANG Chao <chaowang@...hat.com>
Cc: Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fix kdump failures with crashkernel=high
Hi,
On Wed, Dec 03, 2014 at 12:01:23PM +0800, WANG Chao wrote:
>>From your experience It seems like swiotlb isn't working well with
> crashkernel=X,high alone. What about using crashkernel=X,low with
> crashkernel=X,high? Is there any reason you have to use
> crashkernel=X,high alone?
Sure, when I specify an additional crashkernel=X,low then I can get
things to work this way too. But my patch-set is about changing the
default, since the failure was seen on common server systems with the
defaults.
> crashkernel=X,high shouldn't automatically reserve 72M low at the first
> place. Now it's going insane if you increase it to 256M by default.
How should a kernel without some low memory (which has only memory above
4G available) handle any 32bit DMA devices? There would be no way to
allocate DMA-able memory for those devices.
And as I said, if people prefer it I can change the patch-set so that
the amount of low-memory allocated is subtracted from the amount of
high-memory. This way the overall memory usage for kdump would stay the
same while changing the defaults to work on more systems.
Joerg
--
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