On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 12:11:12PM +0530, Mohan Kumar M wrote: > On Tue, Sep 26, 2006 at 11:20:13AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote: > > Pardon my ignorance, but why is there arch dependent functions to begin > > with? This seems like it should be generic code? Yes, I read through the > > ppc64 and i386/x86_64 patches and see both implementations are different, > > but I also didn't see anything arch specific in either of those patches. > > > > Isn't the /proc/iomem trick you are using for i386/x86_64 also usable for > > every arch? > > > > In PPC64, /proc/iomem does not inclue the entry for "Crash kernel" > region as in i386/x86_64. PPC64 code checks for the presence of > linux,crashkernel-base file to check kdump kernel reservation, while > i386/x86_64 checks for /proc/iomem
I wonder if there is any possibility of uinfying the behaviour. I also wonder if there is a good reason PPC64 doesn't use /proc/iomem. > By looking through /proc/iomem is the only way to find whether memory > for crashkernel is reserved successfully or not. Even if the kernel is > not able to reserve the memory for kdump kernel because of some other > reasons, /proc/cmdline will not reflect this (it can not). So in my > opinion checking /proc/iomem is the right option. I agree. -- Horms H: http://www.vergenet.net/~horms/ W: http://www.valinux.co.jp/en/ _______________________________________________ fastboot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
