* Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@in.ibm.com> [2007-10-16 07:49]:
quoted text
> 
> Shouldn't bootmem allocator have the functionality to flag an error if
> we try to reserve a memory which is already reserved? I see that bootmem
> allocator is currently printing a warning under CONFIG_DEBUG_BOOTMEM.

That's probably better, yes. See the next version.

quoted text
> Wouldn't it be better if we reserve the code, data and bss memory also
> using bootmem allocator and when somebody tries to reserve craskernel memory
> and if there is an overlap, boot memory allocator should scream?

It's already marked as reserved. At least on i386 in my test.

quoted text
> In second patch, you are checking for crash kernel reserved memory being
> beyond _end. That will make sure that there is no overlap with kernel
> text, data or bss. I am wondering then why do we need first patch and
> why should we register bss memory in the resources list. Second patch 
> would make sure that there is no overlap with crash kernel memory and kexec
> will not place any segment outside crashkernel memory.

I think we should also present the BSS to the user like we present
text and data.


Thanks,
   Bernhard
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/