Hi Joerg, On Tue 3/4/2014 9:06 AM, Joerg Roedel wrote: > >On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 03:07:26PM -0700, Bill Sumner wrote: >> Bill Sumner (6): >> Crashdump-Accepting-Active-IOMMU-Flags-and-Prototype >> Crashdump-Accepting-Active-IOMMU-Utility-functions >> Crashdump-Accepting-Active-IOMMU-Domain-Interfaces >> Crashdump-Accepting-Active-IOMMU-Copy-Translations >> Crashdump-Accepting-Active-IOMMU-Debug-Print-IOMMU >> Crashdump-Accepting-Active-IOMMU-Call-From-Mainline >> >> drivers/iommu/intel-iommu.c | 1293 >> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- >> 1 file changed, 1225 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-) > >This is a pretty big change, before merging I would like to get more eyes on it. Please make sure you get more reviews on the code and the general concept. A few things I noticed while looking at it: Yes, as I was developing this, I realized that it is far more code than most Linux submissions. In addition to more eyes reviewing the code, I hope to see additional members of the community trying it out -- testing it on a wide variety of system configurations. Let me encourage additional reviewers and testers to look at this fix to crashdump. > >* You put a lot of code into #define CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP. Isn't the same approach necessary to for KEXEC? Until I saw your email, I had been focused only on the immediate problem of fixing crashdump and had not considered using this approach in the more-general context of KEXEC. It certainly looks like it could be useful with KEXEC as well. I would like to take-on the effort of expanding this technique into KEXEC as a separate follow-on project so that the original "fix crashdump" project is not delayed. On a quick look, I believe that the amount of additional code would be minimal; but the expansion of the testing matrix might be quite large. > >* Please get rid of all the pr_debug stuff. Will do. > >* I think it makes sense to put the functions to access the IOMMU > configuration values of the old kernel into a new file. This is better > than adding over 1000 new lines to intel-iommu.c Sounds good. I will move these functions into a new file. > >* I have seen your new single-patch for this change. A single patch with > more than 1200 changed lines is not something anyone is willing to > review. Please split the patches again in a meaningful and bisectable > way. I will return to a multiple-patch set for future submissions. -- Bill
