Hi Xunlei,
On 04/27/17 at 01:25pm, Xunlei Pang wrote:
> On 04/27/2017 at 11:06 AM, Dave Young wrote:
> > [snip]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> static int __init crash_save_vmcoreinfo_init(void)
> >>>>> {
> >>>>> + /* One page should be enough for VMCOREINFO_BYTES under all archs */
> >>>> Can we add a comment in the VMCOREINFO_BYTES header file about the one
> >>>> page assumption?
> >>>>
> >>>> Or just define the VMCOREINFO_BYTES as PAGE_SIZE instead of 4096
> >>> Yes, I considered this before, but VMCOREINFO_BYTES is also used by VMCOREINFO_NOTE_SIZE
> >>> definition which is exported to sysfs, also some platform has larger page size(64KB), so
> >>> I didn't touch this 4096 value.
> >>>
> >>> I think I should use kmalloc() to allocate both of them, then move this comment to Patch3
> >>> kimage_crash_copy_vmcoreinfo().
> >> But on the other hand, using a separate page for them seems safer compared with
> >> using frequently-used slab, what's your opinion?
> > I feel current page based way is better.
> >
> > For 64k page the vmcore note size will increase it seems fine. Do you
> > have concern in mind?
>
> Since tools are supposed to acquire vmcoreinfo note size from sysfs, it should be safe to do so,
> except that there is some waste in memory for larger PAGE_SIZE.
Either way is fine to me, I think it is up to your implementation, if
choose page alloc then modify the macro with PAGE_SIZE looks better.
Thanks
Dave
