Hi Borislav, Do you think the following patch is good at present? diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c index 81f9d23..9213073 100644 --- a/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/setup.c @@ -460,7 +460,7 @@ static void __init memblock_x86_reserve_range_setup_data(void) # define CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX (512 << 20) # define CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX (512 << 20) #else -# define CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX (896UL << 20) +# define CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX (1 << 32) # define CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX MAXMEM #endif For documentation, I will send another patch to improve the description. Thanks, Pingfan On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 7:30 PM Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 07:12:16PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > If we move to high as default, it will allocate 160M high + 256M low. It > > We won't move to high by default - we will *fall* back to high if the > default allocation fails. > > > To make the process less fragile maybe we can remove the 896M limitation > > and only try <4G then go to high. > > Sure, the more robust for the user, the better. > > -- > Regards/Gruss, > Boris. > > Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply. _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
