On 07/10/24 at 09:52am, Jinjie Ruan wrote: > > > On 2024/7/9 22:06, Baoquan He wrote: > > On 07/09/24 at 07:06pm, Jinjie Ruan wrote: > >> > >> > >> On 2024/7/9 18:39, Baoquan He wrote: > >>> On 07/09/24 at 05:50pm, Jinjie Ruan wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On 2024/7/9 17:29, Baoquan He wrote: > >>>>> On 07/08/24 at 09:33pm, Jinjie Ruan wrote: > >>>>>> Currently, x86, arm64, riscv and loongarch has been switched to generic > >>>>>> crashkernel reservation. Also use generic interface to simplify crashkernel > >>>>>> reservation for arm32, and fix two bugs by the way. > >>>>> > >>>>> I am not sure if this is a good idea. I added the generic reservation > >>>>> itnerfaces for ARCH which support crashkernel=,high|low and normal > >>>>> crashkernel reservation, with this, the code can be simplified a lot. > >>>>> However, arm32 doesn't support crashkernel=,high, I am not sure if it's > >>>>> worth taking the change, most importantly, if it will cause > >>>>> misunderstanding or misoperation. > >>>> > >>>> Yes, arm32 doesn't support crashkernel=,high. > >>>> > >>>> However, a little enhancement to the generic code (please see the first > >>>> patch), the generic reservation interfaces can also be applicable to > >>>> architectures that do not support "high" such as arm32, and it can also > >>>> simplify the code (please see the third patch). > >>> > >>> Yeah, I can see the code is simplified. When you specified > >>> 'crashkernel=xM,high', do you think what should be warn out? Because > >>> it's an unsupported syntax on arm32, we should do something to print out > >>> appropriate message. > >> > >> Yes, you are right! In this patch it will print "crashkernel high memory > >> reservation failed." message and out for arm32 if you specify > > > > That message may mislead people to believe crashkernel=,high is > > supported but reservation is failed, then a bug need be filed for this? > > We may expect a message telling this syntax is not supported on this > > ARCH. > > "CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX >= CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX" indicate that the arm32 does > not support "crashkernel=,high", I wonder if this is generic for similar Imagine you are a testing engineer or a distros user, how do you know if "CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX >= CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX" when you test 'crashkernel=,high' and see the failure message? > architecture. If so, the first patch can print such as > "crashkernel=,high is not supported on this ARCH" message. Please consider conprehensively if this is doable, you can paste draft code here to prove it. > > > > >> 'crashkernel=xM,high because "CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX" and > >> "CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX" is identical for arm32. And it should also warn > >> out for other similar architecture. > >> > >> > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
