Hi Eric, On Thu, 12 Jan 2023 11:23:18 -0600 Eric DeVolder <[email protected]> wrote:
>[...] > After looking into this for a bit, to allow hotplug without kexec_file would > require quite a bit of > code movement. Why? Because hotplug is basically built on top of (part of) > the infrastructure that > was needed for kexec_file. > > I'd be inclined to suggest that KEXEC_FILE be a required dependency for > CRASH_HOTPLUG, ie: > > config CRASH_HOTPLUG > bool "Update the crash elfcorehdr on system configuration changes" > default n > - depends on CRASH_DUMP && (HOTPLUG_CPU || MEMORY_HOTPLUG) > + depends on CRASH_DUMP && KEXEC_FILE && (HOTPLUG_CPU || MEMORY_HOTPLUG) > > > If that isn't feasible, then it would appear quite a bit of surgery is needed > to properly separate > out the items hotplug needs from kexec_file. > > Thoughts? I would have thought that CPU hotplug can be handled in the kernel only if the crash image was loaded by the kernel with kexec_file_load(2). When the image is loaded with kexec_load(2), then all data structures are prepared by the user-space utility kexec(8), and the kernel generally has no idea how to handle them. In short, I believe that by definition there must be this dependency of CRASH_HOTPLUG on KEXEC_FILE. Petr T _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
