On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 12:53:19PM +0100, Fleming, Matt wrote: > On 28 May 2014 15:51, Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:09:35AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > > > [..] > >> > I've only vaguely been following along with the other thread, so please > >> > summarise everything again in your patch. Particularly, I need answers > >> > to the following questions, > >> > > >> > - Are you trying to fix a kexec/kdump regression? > >> > >> Somehow it is a regression. > > > > Well, it is a *regression*. Previously kdump would work with > > SGI UV machines as it used "noefi". Now kexec by default thinks that > > efi is enabled and 1:1 mappings are in place and that does not work > > with SGI UV machines. > > So, if someone boots an SGI UV machine with the "noefi" kernel command > line parameter, the kernel still creates > /sys/firmware/efi/runtime-map/ ? Why does kexec/kdump think a kernel > booted with "noefi" supports EFI? > > Or are we talking about a different "noefi" parameter? Only second kernel boots with "noefi" and this parameter is appened by kexec-tools to second kernel command line. So first kernel will still boot *without noefi* and kexec-tools wil think that this system support booting second kernel with UEFI enabled. I don't know if we export /sys/firmware/efi/runtime-map/ in case of non 1:1 mapping or not. Dave and Boris will know better. Thanks Vivek -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-efi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
