Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754751Ab0LPQx6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2010 11:53:58 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:55740 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753756Ab0LPQxx (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2010 11:53:53 -0500 Message-ID: <4D0A43FD.3070509@zytor.com> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:53:17 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101103 Fedora/1.0-0.33.b2pre.fc14 Thunderbird/3.1.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Vivek Goyal CC: Stanislaw Gruszka , Yinghai Lu , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Maxim Uvarov , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Neil Horman , "Eric W. Biederman" Subject: Re: kdump broken on 2.6.37-rc4 References: <20101209124117.GA6032@redhat.com> <4D01377B.5070809@kernel.org> <20101213100848.GA2237@redhat.com> <4D0663F0.2060103@kernel.org> <4D06783C.6040009@zytor.com> <20101214224135.GB19693@redhat.com> <20101215103954.GA2243@redhat.com> <4D09958D.2040907@kernel.org> <20101216100050.GA2261@redhat.com> <4D0A3B69.6080700@zytor.com> <20101216162255.GE13870@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20101216162255.GE13870@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1281 Lines: 35 On 12/16/2010 08:22 AM, Vivek Goyal wrote: >> >> I think limiting kdump below 512 MiB on 32 bits may make sense; perhaps >> even on 64 bits. It's pretty conservative, after all... >> >> Opinions? > > Actually it will be good to know why 512MB. I know in the past we have > been talking of reserving memory in higher memory regions and Neil Horman > had been trying to boot bzImage in 64 bit mode so that it can be run > from higher addresses. > > So right now limiting it is easy but it is desirable to be able to run > bzImage from as high a address as possible and knowing why to limit it > to 512MB can help see if there is a way to get rid of that limitation. > > I probably would not worry about 32bit systems but for 64 bit, I > cerntainly want to make it boot from higher addresses (if it is possible > technically). > It's worth noting that there is almost always going to be a need for *some* low memory. -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/