Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 05/10] x86: kdump: move reserve_crashkernel[_low]()
 into crash_core.c
To:     Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
CC:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        <x86@kernel.org>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Dave Young <dyoung@redhat.com>,
        Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>,
        Eric Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
        <kexec@lists.infradead.org>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>, "Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@lwn.net>,
        <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>, Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        Feng Zhou <zhoufeng.zf@bytedance.com>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>,
        Chen Zhou <dingguo.cz@antgroup.com>
References: <20211210065533.2023-1-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
 <20211210065533.2023-6-thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
 <20211214104558.GA28607@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
From:   "Leizhen (ThunderTown)" <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <097c6a8c-3b96-19b4-2bb9-bf2dcb4a6109@huawei.com>
Date:   Tue, 14 Dec 2021 20:38:41 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20211214104558.GA28607@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 2021/12/14 18:45, Baoquan He wrote:
>> +		/* User specifies base address explicitly. */
> If you plan to repost, please take above sentence off either. Then we
> can say this patch is only doing code moving.
> 
>> +		unsigned long long start;
>> +
> OK, I can see that this patch is only moving code, and introducing
> CONFIG_ARCH_WANT_RESERVE_CRASH_KERNEL to wrap them appropriately, no
> extra functionality change added or removed, except of this place.
> An alignment checking is added for the user specified base address.
> I love this checking. While I have to say it will be more perfect if
> it's put in another small patch, that will be look much better from
> patch splitting and reviewing point of view.

Good eye. I will put it in a new patch.

> 
> This whole patch looks great to me, thanks for the effort.
> 
>