On Tue, Nov 23, 2021 at 08:46:35PM +0800, Zhen Lei wrote: > Chen Zhou (10): > x86: kdump: replace the hard-coded alignment with macro CRASH_ALIGN > x86: kdump: make the lower bound of crash kernel reservation > consistent > x86: kdump: use macro CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX in functions > reserve_crashkernel() > x86: kdump: move xen_pv_domain() check and insert_resource() to > setup_arch() > x86: kdump: move reserve_crashkernel[_low]() into crash_core.c > arm64: kdump: introduce some macros for crash kernel reservation > arm64: kdump: reimplement crashkernel=X > x86, arm64: Add ARCH_WANT_RESERVE_CRASH_KERNEL config > of: fdt: Add memory for devices by DT property > "linux,usable-memory-range" > kdump: update Documentation about crashkernel > > Zhen Lei (1): > of: fdt: Aggregate the processing of "linux,usable-memory-range" Apart from a minor comment I made on patch 8 and some comments from Rob that need addressing, the rest looks fine to me. Ingo stated in the past that he's happy to ack the x86 changes as long as there's no functional change (and that's the case AFAICT). Ingo, does your conditional ack still stand? In terms of merging, I'm happy to take it all through the arm64 tree with acks from the x86 maintainers. Alternatively, with the change I mentioned for patch 8, the first 5 patches could be queued via the tip tree on a stable branch and I can base the rest of the arm64 on top. Thomas, Ingo, Peter, any preference? Thanks. -- Catalin _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
