[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180524075615.GC1940@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 24 May 2018 15:56:15 +0800
From: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.cz>
Cc: dzickus@...hat.com, Neil Horman <nhorman@...hat.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, bhe@...hat.com,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kdump: add default crashkernel reserve kernel config
options
> > > Instead of setting aside a significant chunk of memory nobody can use,
> > > [...] reserve a significant chunk of memory that the kernel is prevented
> > > from using [...], but applications are free to use it.
> >
> > That works great, because user space pages are filtered out in the
> > common case, so they can be used freely by the panic kernel.
>
> Good suggestion. I have been reading that posts already at the same time before I saw
> this reply from you :)
>
> That could be a good idea and worth to discuss more. I cced Hari
> already in the thread. Hari, is it possible for you to extend your
> idea to general use, ie. shared by both kdump and fadump? Anyway I
> think that is another topic we can discuss separately.
BTW, I remember we had some Red hat internal discussion about CMA previously
there is a problem, that is we have crashkernel=,high for reserving high
memory and ,low for low memory, we were not sure if CMA can handle this
case.
Thanks
Dave
Thanks
Dave
Powered by blists - more mailing lists