lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2] Do not reserve crashkernel high memory if crashkernel low memory reserving failed
On 07/21/15 at 09:38am, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi, Baoquan
> >
> > The interface was introduced by Yinghai, ccing him.
>
> Also, why was this syntax introduced in the first place? Why should the user
> care??

The history is like below, I might miss something, Yinghai/HPA/Vivek may correct
and provide more background:

First commit is below:
commit 7d41a8a4a2b2438621a9159477bff36a11d79a42
Author: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Date: Thu Jan 24 12:20:10 2013 -0800

x86, kdump: Remove crashkernel range find limit for 64bit

Previously kdump reservation is limited to <896M, above commit remove the limitation.
Then because of kdump kernel need access low mem for swiotlb buffer, thus there's
commit below:

commit 0212f9159694be61c6bc52e925fa76643e0c1abf
Author: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Date: Thu Jan 24 12:20:11 2013 -0800

x86: Add Crash kernel low reservation

Later, Vivek found old kexec-tools does not work, then Yinghai introduced new param
crashkernel_high=:

commit 55a20ee7804ab64ac90bcdd4e2868a42829e2784
Author: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Date: Mon Apr 15 22:23:47 2013 -0700

x86, kdump: Retore crashkernel= to allocate under 896M

Finally it becomes crashkernel=x,high:
commit adbc742bf78695bb98c79d18c558b61571748b99
Author: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@kernel.org>
Date: Mon Apr 15 22:23:48 2013 -0700

x86, kdump: Change crashkernel_high/low= to crashkernel=,high/low


>
> We should only have a single crashkernel option, to enable it - and everything
> else should be figured out by the kernel, automatically.

Presonally I do not current complicated params either, I hope we can have an
elegant interface, but seems there's no better way to resolve the low memory
only requirement for software tlb.

>
> Any other sub-options just paper over some fragility elsewhere and make the
> feature harder to use, hence more fragile.

Agree, it is becoming worse..

Thanks
Dave


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-07-21 10:41    [W:0.114 / U:0.132 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site