Am?rico, Ok, when I get to work, I will post the maps for 2.6.32 and 2.6.38 for comparison. tim On Nov 16, 2011 5:31 AM, "Am?rico Wang" <xiyou.wangcong at gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Tim Hartrick <tim at edgecast.com> wrote: > > America, > > > > To clarify, crashkernel=480 at 2G or @1G doesn"t work either. Further, for > > older kernels (2.6.32) it was possible to create crashkernel areas larger > > than 480M (crashkernel=512M). Starting somewhere around 2.6.36, this > > stopped working. Are you saying this was an intentional change? > > > > No, I am not saying this. > > Depends on your machine, different versions of kernel may detect > different memory ranges, so, you need to compare the output > of /proc/iomem, or BIOS provided RAM map (in dmesg), on different > version kernels, to know why that happened. > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/kexec/attachments/20111116/04da862d/attachment.html>
