Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752080AbdLAPhV (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2017 10:37:21 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:50214 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751254AbdLAPhU (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2017 10:37:20 -0500 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 16:37:13 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Dave Hansen Cc: Juerg Haefliger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, mingo@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, hughd@google.com, luto@kernel.org Subject: Re: KAISER: kexec triggers a warning Message-ID: <20171201153713.apdoi6em7c4iynlr@pd.tnic> References: <03012d01-4d04-1d58-aa93-425f142f9292@canonical.com> <84c7dd7d-5e01-627e-6f26-5c1e30a87683@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <84c7dd7d-5e01-627e-6f26-5c1e30a87683@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170609 (1.8.3) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 483 Lines: 15 On Fri, Dec 01, 2017 at 07:31:36AM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > The only question is whether we want to preserve _some_ kind of warning > there, or just axe it entirely. Right, my fear would be if we keep it, then we'd have to go and whitelist or somehow track those users which are an exception... OTOH, it might be prudent to have a warning to catch such abnormal situations... -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.