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:   Tue, 12 Feb 2019 10:45:05 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>
Cc:     Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
        Anup Patel <Anup.Patel@wdc.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@wdc.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] RISC-V: Implement keepinitrd kernel parameter
Message-ID: <20190212184505.GA10984@infradead.org>
References: <20190119132650.9978-1-anup.patel@wdc.com>
 <20190119132650.9978-7-anup.patel@wdc.com>
 <20190212070807.GD26747@infradead.org>
 <CAAhSdy1NED22YyYrAJDqPkDqT1c2ms2QC9OjHP0qLwHT+o2zvg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAAhSdy1NED22YyYrAJDqPkDqT1c2ms2QC9OjHP0qLwHT+o2zvg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 12, 2019 at 03:53:21PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> If it is initramfs (i.e. CPIO image) then contents of CPIO archive
> are extracted to create a ramfs instance.
> 
> If it is initrd (i.e. some filesystem image) then RAM block device
> is created in-place at initrd location. (Please correct me if I am
> wrong about initrd here).

No.  If it is an initrd image we still copy it into the rootfs first,
and then load it into a ram disk.  Take a look at
init/initramfs.c:populate_rootfs() and
init/do_mounts_initrd.c:initrd_load().

> So in case of initrd we might not want to free-up the RAM but
> we can certainly free-up in case of initramfs.

No, in either case we do not need the original initramfs/initrd
memory.  I suspect arm has this as a workaround for some weird
legacy boot issue, but I can't see any reason why we would not want
to free the memory on riscv.