On 11/28/25 at 03:11pm, Sourabh Jain wrote: > Hello Baoquan, > > On 27/11/25 21:00, Baoquan He wrote: > > On 11/27/25 at 05:31pm, Sourabh Jain wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > > > Do we have plan to support KEXEC_DEBUG flag? > > > > > > Because upstream kexec-tools already added support for KEXEC_DEBUG flag > > > and that breaks the kexec_load with -d option. > > > > > > - kexec: add kexec flag to support debug printing > > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/kernel/kexec/kexec-tools.git/commit/?id=71d6fd99af7e > > I think we should revert that kexec-tools commit. > > Yeah, userspace changes shouldn't go in until the kernel patches are > finalized. It seems that there are disagreements regarding the approach > and usefulness of this patch series, so reverting the kexec-tools patch > might be the right thing to avoid breaking anything for now.
The patch 1 is issue fixing, that is a good one. While patch 2, 3 are trying to add debugging printing for kexec_load interface which I think is not needed. I added debugging printing for kexec_file_load because I has been using 'kexec -d' to debug for kexec_load while kexec_file_load didn't have. So I mimicked kexec_load's debugging printing to add one for kexec_file_load. Now patch 2,3's adding doesn't make sense as he said he is doing for future need. > > I have one question: should the kernel advertise KEXEC_DEBUG so that > backward compatibility can be maintained between the kernel and > kexec-tools? Or is that too much for a debugging flag? How was backward > compatibility handled when we added the KEXEC_FILE_DEBUG flag? When I added KEXEC_FILE_DEBUG, I didn't consider backward compatibility. That is making the then latest kernel match the then latest kexec-tools. > > > This whole patchset is > > non-sense. Because of my carelessness, that userspace patch was merged. > > > > Hi Sourabh, > > > > Could you go through this patchset and help check if they are really > > needed? I can't find anything to convince myself. Thanks. > > Sure I will review this patch series. Thanks. Please check patch 2,3 to see if we really need the debugging printing for kexec_load, or its adding really brings benefit even if it's a little bit compared with the mess it brings; and if my objecting is too subjective. Thanks Baoquan
