On Wed, 27 Jan 2016 11:15:46 -0800 Andrew Morton <akpm at linux-foundation.org> wrote: > On Wed, 27 Jan 2016 14:48:31 +0300 Dmitry Safonov <dsafonov at virtuozzo.com> wrote: > > > For allocation of kimage failure or kexec_prepare or load segments > > errors there is no need to keep crashkernel memory mapped. > > It will affect only s390 as map/unmap hook defined only for it. > > As on unmap s390 also changes os_info structure let's check return code > > and add info only on success. > > > > This conflicts (both mechanically and somewhat conceptually) with > Xunlei Pang's "kexec: Introduce a protection mechanism for the > crashkernel reserved memory" and "kexec: provide > arch_kexec_protect(unprotect)_crashkres()". > > http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-introduce-a-protection-mechanism-for-the-crashkernel-reserved-memory.patch > http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-introduce-a-protection-mechanism-for-the-crashkernel-reserved-memory-v4.patch > > and > > http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-provide-arch_kexec_protectunprotect_crashkres.patch > http://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmots/broken-out/kexec-provide-arch_kexec_protectunprotect_crashkres-v4.patch Hmm, It looks to me that arch_kexec_(un)protect_crashkres() has exactly the same semantics as crash_(un)map_reserved_pages(). On s390 we don't have the crashkernel memory mapped and therefore need crash_map_reserved_pages() before loading something into crashkernel memory. Perhaps I missed something? Michael
