On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > * jerry.hoemann@xxxxxx <jerry.hoemann@xxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 08:44:04PM +0200, Pekka Enberg wrote: >> > On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 8:04 PM, <jerry.hoemann@xxxxxx> wrote: >> > > Making this issue a quirk will be a lot more practical. Its a small, focused >> > > change whose implications are limited and more easily understood. >> > >> > There's nothing practical with requiring users to pass a kernel option >> > to make kdump work. It's a workaround, sure, but it's not a proper >> > fix. >> >> One already has to specify command line arguments to enable kdump. >> See "crashkernel=" in Documentation/kernel-parameters.txt. > >> As i said in an earlier mail we are working w/ distros. [...] Why just asking distros to append ",high" in their installation program for 64bit by default? If they don't want to do that, you can add instruction in your product notes, to ask user/admin to add that if kdump fails. > > >> As i said in earlier mail, i am willing to change implementation to >> some type of black/white listing. > > Is it possible to fix it the way hpa suggested? > What is hpa's suggestion? Yinghai -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
