Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 14 Jan 2019 20:59:40 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Dave Anderson <anderson@redhat.com>
Cc:     Kazuhito Hagio <k-hagio@ab.jp.nec.com>,
        Lianbo Jiang <lijiang@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
        tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org,
        akpm@linux-foundation.org, bhe@redhat.com, dyoung@redhat.com,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v6] kdump: add the vmcoreinfo documentation
Message-ID: <20190114195940.GS2773@zn.tnic>
References: <20190110121944.6050-1-lijiang@redhat.com>
 <20190110121944.6050-2-lijiang@redhat.com>
 <20190111123300.GE4729@zn.tnic>
 <4AE2DC15AC0B8543882A74EA0D43DBEC035661E8@BPXM09GP.gisp.nec.co.jp>
 <20190114180142.GO2773@zn.tnic>
 <2126185079.69727846.1547492312033.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
 <20190114192144.GQ2773@zn.tnic>
 <134663991.69764038.1547494607008.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <134663991.69764038.1547494607008.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 02:36:47PM -0500, Dave Anderson wrote:
> There's no reading of the dumpfile's memory involved, and that being the case,
> the vmlinux file is not utilized.  That's the whole point of the crash option, i.e.,
> taking a vmcore file, and trying to determine what kernel should be used with it:
> 
>   $ man crash
>   ...
>        --osrelease dumpfile
>               Display the OSRELEASE vmcoreinfo string from a kdump dumpfile header.

I don't understand - if you have the vmcoreinfo (which I assume is part
of the vmcore, yes, no?) you can go and dig out the kernel version from
it, no?

Why should you not utilize the vmcore file?

(I'm most likely missing something.)

> Well, I just don't agree that the OSRELEASE item is "frivolous". It's
> been in place, and depended upon, for many years.

Yeah, no. The ABI argument is moot in this case as in the last couple
of months people have been persuading me that vmcoreinfo is not ABI. So
you guys need to make up your mind what is it. And if it is an ABI, it
wasn't documented anywhere.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.