Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 1 Apr 2013 09:34:28 -0400 | From | Vivek Goyal <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] kexec: use Crash kernel for Crash kernel low |
| |
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 02:14:18PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 02:50:18PM -0700, Yinghai Lu wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 12:42 PM, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote: > > > So it is a forgone conclusion that these new kernel changes to > > > crashkernel=X in 3.9 are incompatible with older kexec-tools and one > > > needs to upgrade kexec-tools. > > > > I thought that you and hpa all agreed that user need to update kexec-tools with > > new kernel v3.9. It that still right? > > I can update kexec-tools and I don't have problems with that. I am only > concerned about some xyz user complaining that new kernel stopped working > with old kexec-tools and then possibly face the rant from Linus about > breaking user space. :-) > > To me we could maintain backward compatibility by retaining the existing > behavior of crashkernle=X. That is look for specificied memory below > 896M first and then go higher. > > And hide new semantics behind new kernel parameters or by extending > existing parameter (say crashkernel=X:search_high_first) to specify how > to search for reserved memory. > > In both the cases we should probably retain the logic of auto reserving > low memory for software iotlb and let user opt out if there is no need. > > So we don't have a strong reason that why we should break existing > kexec-tools. So I would prefer not to break it. > > But I think this is hpa's decision.
hpa,
ping. Any thoughts on this?
Thanks Vivek
| |