On 05/24/18 at 03:56pm, Dave Young wrote: > > > > Instead of setting aside a significant chunk of memory nobody can use, > > > > [...] reserve a significant chunk of memory that the kernel is prevented > > > > from using [...], but applications are free to use it. > > > > > > That works great, because user space pages are filtered out in the > > > common case, so they can be used freely by the panic kernel. > > > > Good suggestion. I have been reading that posts already at the same time before I saw > > this reply from you :) > > > > That could be a good idea and worth to discuss more. I cced Hari > > already in the thread. Hari, is it possible for you to extend your > > idea to general use, ie. shared by both kdump and fadump? Anyway I > > think that is another topic we can discuss separately. > > BTW, I remember we had some Red hat internal discussion about CMA previously > there is a problem, that is we have crashkernel=,high for reserving high > memory and ,low for low memory, we were not sure if CMA can handle this > case. Pratyush ever investigated this too see if CMA can be used so that we can dynamically adjust the crashkernel memory after boot. The result is CMA is not good. I doubt fadump can really make use of CMA to reserve crashkernel. Thanks Baoquan _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
