[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aaddd54b-d1d6-d979-ba48-a2f89552a809@oracle.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2023 11:17:30 -0500
From: Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@...cle.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>, linux@...linux.org.uk,
catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, chenhuacai@...nel.org,
geert@...ux-m68k.org, tsbogend@...ha.franken.de,
James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com, deller@....de,
ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp, dalias@...c.org,
glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-m68k@...ts.linux-m68k.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sh@...r.kernel.org
Cc: kernel@...0n.name, npiggin@...il.com, christophe.leroy@...roup.eu,
paul.walmsley@...ive.com, palmer@...belt.com,
aou@...s.berkeley.edu, hca@...ux.ibm.com, gor@...ux.ibm.com,
agordeev@...ux.ibm.com, borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com,
svens@...ux.ibm.com, hpa@...or.com, keescook@...omium.org,
paulmck@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, frederic@...nel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ardb@...nel.org,
samitolvanen@...gle.com, juerg.haefliger@...onical.com,
arnd@...db.de, rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk,
linus.walleij@...aro.org, sebastian.reichel@...labora.com,
rppt@...nel.org, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
anshuman.khandual@....com, ziy@...dia.com, masahiroy@...nel.org,
ndesaulniers@...gle.com, mhiramat@...nel.org, ojeda@...nel.org,
thunder.leizhen@...wei.com, xin3.li@...el.com, tj@...nel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, tsi@...oix.net, bhe@...hat.com,
hbathini@...ux.ibm.com, sourabhjain@...ux.ibm.com,
boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 10/21] powerpc/kexec: refactor for kernel/Kconfig.kexec
On 6/14/23 22:34, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@...cle.com> writes:
>
>> The kexec and crash kernel options are provided in the common
>> kernel/Kconfig.kexec. Utilize the common options and provide
>> the ARCH_HAS_ and ARCH_SUPPORTS_ entries to recreate the
>> equivalent set of KEXEC and CRASH options.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric DeVolder <eric.devolder@...cle.com>
>> Reviewed-by: Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@...ux.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 55 ++++++++++++++------------------------------
>> 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
>> index bff5820b7cda..36f2fe0cc8a5 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/Kconfig
>> @@ -588,41 +588,21 @@ config PPC64_SUPPORTS_MEMORY_FAILURE
>> default "y" if PPC_POWERNV
>> select ARCH_SUPPORTS_MEMORY_FAILURE
>>
>> -config KEXEC
>> - bool "kexec system call"
>> - depends on PPC_BOOK3S || PPC_E500 || (44x && !SMP)
>> - select KEXEC_CORE
>> - help
>> - kexec is a system call that implements the ability to shutdown your
>> - current kernel, and to start another kernel. It is like a reboot
>> - but it is independent of the system firmware. And like a reboot
>> - you can start any kernel with it, not just Linux.
>> -
>> - The name comes from the similarity to the exec system call.
>> -
>> - It is an ongoing process to be certain the hardware in a machine
>> - is properly shutdown, so do not be surprised if this code does not
>> - initially work for you. As of this writing the exact hardware
>> - interface is strongly in flux, so no good recommendation can be
>> - made.
>> -
>> -config KEXEC_FILE
>> - bool "kexec file based system call"
>> - select KEXEC_CORE
>> - select HAVE_IMA_KEXEC if IMA
>> - select KEXEC_ELF
>> - depends on PPC64
>> - depends on CRYPTO=y
>> - depends on CRYPTO_SHA256=y
> ...
>> +
>> +config ARCH_HAS_KEXEC_FILE
>> + def_bool PPC64 && CRYPTO && CRYPTO_SHA256
>
> The =y's got lost here.
>
> I think they were both meaningful, because both options are tristate. So
> this previously required them to be built-in (=y), whereas after your
> patch it will allow them to be modules.
>
> I don't know for sure that those options need to be built-in, but that's
> what the code does now, so this patch shouldn't change it, at least
> without an explanation.
>
> cheers
Thanks Michael, I've applied =y's. Good catch!
eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists