On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 08:15:23 -0500 ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eric W. Biederman) wrote: > > For 3), people can still use kexec_load and develop/fix for it, if no > > kexec_file_load supported. But 32-bit arm should be a different one, > > more like i386, we will leave it as is, and fix anything which could > > break it. But people really expects to improve or add feature to it? E.g > > in this patchset, the mem hotplug issue James raised, I assume James is > > focusing on arm64, x86_64, but not 32-bit arm. As DavidH commented in > > another reply, people even don't agree to continue supporting memory > > hotplug on 32-bit system. We ever took effort to fix a memory hotplug > > bug on i386 with a patch, but people would rather set it as BROKEN. > > For memory hotplug just reload. Userspace already gets good events. > > We should not expect anything except a panic kernel to be loaded over a > memory hotplug event. The kexec on panic code should actually be loaded > in a location that we don't reliquish if asked for it. Is that a nack for James's patchset? _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
