[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-s390
Subject:    Re: [patch v2 2/2] s390: Add architecture code for unmapping
From:       Michael Holzheu <holzheu () linux ! vnet ! ibm ! com>
Date:       2011-09-15 8:48:03
Message-ID: 1316076483.3526.4.camel () br98xy6r
[Download RAW message or body]

Hello Vivek, Andrew,

On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 14:29 -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 10:58:28AM +0200, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> > > Why not make this unconditional, for all architectures which support
> > > hugepages?  ie:
> > > 
> > > #ifdef HPAGE_SIZE
> > > #define KEXEC_CRASH_MEM_ALIGN HPAGE_SIZE
> > > #else
> > > #define KEXEC_CRASH_MEM_ALIGN PAGE_SIZE
> > > #endif
> > 
> > > in include/linux/kexec.h?
> > > 
> > > IOW, what are the compromises here?
> > 
> > If we would do it that way, crashkernel memory on architectures that
> > support large pages but do not support unmapping of crashkernel memory
> > would always be aligned to HPAGE_SIZE. But only PAGE_SIZE alignment
> > would be necessary in that case.
> > 
> > If that is acceptable I have no problem to define that unconditional for
> > all architectures. Vivek what do you think?
> 
> As PAGE_SIZE alignment is sufficient for rest of the architecture, I 
> am fine with keeping it in arch dependent files.

Ok fine. So I will resend the two patches including Andrew's
resource_size() fix and keep KEXEC_CRASH_MEM_ALIGN definition
architecture dependent.

Michael

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]