[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181031101054.GB15955@zn.tnic>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 11:10:54 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
Cc: lijiang <lijiang@...hat.com>, Baoquan He <bhe@...hat.com>,
Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@...e.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, Kazuhito Hagio <khagio@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kdump, vmcoreinfo: Export sme_me_mask value to vmcoreinfo
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:47:48AM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> It is a mist only a few kdump people know them, documenting them will help
> people to understand and review. It will also be clearer instead of
> digging into code?
Wholeheartedly agreed. Especially if people start using vmcoreinfo for
other stuff, like live debugging:
https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1540593788-28181-1-git-send-email-bhsharma@redhat.com
> The document can briefly explain what is vmcoreinfo, why we need it, and
> some background info. Then list the exported values with some
> classifying by core kernel, arch related, string or number etc. For
> most of them like Baoquan said no need more explanation, but add
> explanations for something if needed like this sme mask.
And add explanations for *all* of them!
If this becomes an API, then it better be documented.
> But I think this can be done separately instead of blocking this patch.
We have three months to the next merge window - I'm sure you guys can do
both. :-)
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists