linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] Do not reserve crashkernel high memory if crashkernel low memory reserving failed

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: <20150721085846.GA23020@dhcp-128-28.nay.redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 21 Jul 2015 16:58:46 +0800
From:	Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>
To:	Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
Cc:	tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, bp@...e.de,
	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, jkosina@...e.cz, vgoyal@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, yinghai@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Do not reserve crashkernel high memory if crashkernel
 low memory reserving failed

On 07/21/15 at 04:23pm, Dave Young wrote:
> > I think so. the reason why ,low is introduced is swiotlb or pci device
> > need low memory when crashkernel is reserved above 4G. Low memory is
> > necessary when ,high is specified unless user can make sure their
> > machines don't need low memory and specify crashkernel=0,low explictly.
> 
> I think forcing user to provide crashkernel=0,low even they do not need
> is bad, IMHO one should provided crashkernel value they really need..

Maybe system which don't need low memory is rare, only for testing?

--
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/