On 03/01/16 at 05:53pm, Xunlei Pang wrote: > This is a bug fix. > > After this, I will try to do a cleanup for crash_unmap/map_reserved_pages() > (only used by S390) to consolidate it with arch_kexec_unprotect/protect_crashkres(). Hi Xunlei, Minfei, I think you need discuss together about how to do clean up codes in this place. From my point of view, arch_map/unmap_reserved_pages and arch_kexec_protect/unprotect_crashkres() are for the same goal but by different ways on different arch. So for Xunlei's patchset, you might need to rethink your implementation, the name of function. I personally think you just implement a x86 specific arch_map/unmap_reserved_pages. It may need a more generic name, and then add your x86 arch specific implementation. Sorry I can't see your patches on my mail client, Xunlei. Since Andrew asked, I just checked these. I am fine with Minfei's patch 1/2. But for patch 2/2, it's a little comfortable to me. Is it really necessary to abstract code block from kexec_load, then wrap them into a newly added function do_kexec_load()? Without this wrapping is there a way to do your bug fix? Is there possibility that do_kexec_load will be called in other places? What's the benefit to wrap it into do_kexec_load against not wrapping? Thanks Baoquan > > Regards, > Xunlei > > On 03/01/2016 at 04:02 PM, Minfei Huang wrote: > > v1: > > - Bisect the patch according to Andrew Morton's suggestion > > > > Minfei Huang (2): > > kexec: Make a pair of map/unmap reserved pages in error path > > kexec: Do a cleanup for function kexec_load > > > > kernel/kexec.c | 112 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- > > 1 file changed, 63 insertions(+), 49 deletions(-) > > > > > _______________________________________________ > kexec mailing list > kexec at lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
