[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251126223127.GIaSd_v7juUkaW4RTA@fat_crate.local>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2025 23:31:27 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Kiryl Shutsemau <kas@...nel.org>
Cc: "Pratik R. Sampat" <prsampat@....com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev, linux-efi@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tglx@...utronix.de,
mingo@...hat.com, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, ardb@...nel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, david@...hat.com, osalvador@...e.de,
thomas.lendacky@....com, michael.roth@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] mm: Add support for unaccepted memory hotplug
On Wed, Nov 26, 2025 at 11:12:13AM +0000, Kiryl Shutsemau wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/efi.h b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/efi.h
> > index 4f7027f33def..a220a1966cae 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/boot/compressed/efi.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/compressed/efi.h
> > @@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ struct efi_unaccepted_memory {
> > u32 unit_size;
> > u64 phys_base;
> > u64 size;
> > + bool mem_reserved;
> > unsigned long *bitmap;
> > };
> >
>
> Again, this is ABI break for kexec.
ABI break for kexec? Is that a thing?
Since when do we enforce ABI compatibility for kexec and where are we
documenting that?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists