On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 02:26:27PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote: > On 04/28/16 at 10:28am, Russell King wrote: > > diff --git a/include/linux/kexec.h b/include/linux/kexec.h > > index 52a3a221bcb2..99cb9dac7909 100644 > > --- a/include/linux/kexec.h > > +++ b/include/linux/kexec.h > > @@ -318,6 +318,44 @@ int __weak arch_kexec_apply_relocations_add(const Elf_Ehdr *ehdr, > > int __weak arch_kexec_apply_relocations(const Elf_Ehdr *ehdr, Elf_Shdr *sechdrs, > > unsigned int relsec); > > > > +#ifndef page_to_boot_pfn > > +static inline unsigned long page_to_boot_pfn(struct page *page) > > +{ > > + return page_to_pfn(page); > > +} > > +#endif > > I am thinking if it's appropriate to introduce a new concept which only > exists in a certain system of a certain ARCH. Is it unavoidable? If have > to can we name it as kexec_page_to_pfn/kexec_pfn_to_page, etc? People > might not need to know about boot view physical address and kernel view > physical address things when they just want to understand kexec > implementation related to one ARCH except of ARM, even related to ARM > but not Keystone 2. Well, what do you suggest we do instead? Eric, please get involved in this discussion, as this was your idea. -- RMK's Patch system: http://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html