[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+CK2bA40wQvX=KieE5Qg2Ny5ZyiDAAjAb9W7Phu2Ou_9r6bOA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2019 09:07:54 -0400
From: Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>
To: James Morse <james.morse@....com>
Cc: Bhupesh Sharma <bhsharma@...hat.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
kexec mailing list <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, will@...nel.org,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [v1 0/5] allow to reserve memory for normal kexec kernel
> > Enabling MMU and D-Cache for relocation would essentially require the
> > same changes in kernel. Could you please share exactly why these were
> > not accepted upstream into kexec-tools?
>
> Because '--no-checks' is a much simpler alternative.
>
> More of the discussion:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/5599813d-f83c-d154-287a-c131c48292ca@arm.com/
>
> While you can make purgatory a fully-fledged operating system, it doesn't really need to
> do anything on arm64. Errata-workarounds alone are a reason not do start down this path.
Thank you James. I will summaries the information gathered from the
yesterday's/today's discussion and add it to the cover letter together
with ARM64 tag. I think, the patch series makes sense for ARM64 only,
unless there are other platforms that disable caching/MMU during
relocation.
Thank you,
Pasha
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> James
Powered by blists - more mailing lists