On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 22:54, Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Tony Luck wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 01:17:01PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote: > > > [ add Tony who may care about the more-reliable removal ] > > > > I don't think I care about removal the fake options. I have had > > systems that support real "more-reliable" memory for many years. > > Ok, lets remove it and see what happens. I recall now that the major > policy knob that users may care about is efi=nosoftreserve, and the > ability to specify efi_fake_mem for testing purposes can move to memmap= > on the assumption that kernel-devs are much less likely to specify > broken settings, or at least can pick up the pieces. > > Ard, you can add: > > Acked-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > Thanks all.
