Re: [PATCH 5/7] x86: kexec_file: lift CRASH_MAX_RANGES limit on crash_mem buffer

2018-03-01 Thread AKASHI Takahiro
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 01:31:53PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > On 02/27/18 at 01:48pm, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > While CRASH_MAX_RANGES (== 16) seems to be good enough, fixed-number > > array is not a good idea in general. > > > > In this patch, size of crash_mem buffer is calculated as before

Re: [PATCH 5/7] x86: kexec_file: lift CRASH_MAX_RANGES limit on crash_mem buffer

2018-03-01 Thread AKASHI Takahiro
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 01:31:53PM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > On 02/27/18 at 01:48pm, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > > While CRASH_MAX_RANGES (== 16) seems to be good enough, fixed-number > > array is not a good idea in general. > > > > In this patch, size of crash_mem buffer is calculated as before

Re: [PATCH 5/7] x86: kexec_file: lift CRASH_MAX_RANGES limit on crash_mem buffer

2018-03-01 Thread Dave Young
On 02/27/18 at 01:48pm, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > While CRASH_MAX_RANGES (== 16) seems to be good enough, fixed-number > array is not a good idea in general. > > In this patch, size of crash_mem buffer is calculated as before and > the buffer is now dynamically allocated. This change also allows

Re: [PATCH 5/7] x86: kexec_file: lift CRASH_MAX_RANGES limit on crash_mem buffer

2018-03-01 Thread Dave Young
On 02/27/18 at 01:48pm, AKASHI Takahiro wrote: > While CRASH_MAX_RANGES (== 16) seems to be good enough, fixed-number > array is not a good idea in general. > > In this patch, size of crash_mem buffer is calculated as before and > the buffer is now dynamically allocated. This change also allows

[PATCH 5/7] x86: kexec_file: lift CRASH_MAX_RANGES limit on crash_mem buffer

2018-02-26 Thread AKASHI Takahiro
While CRASH_MAX_RANGES (== 16) seems to be good enough, fixed-number array is not a good idea in general. In this patch, size of crash_mem buffer is calculated as before and the buffer is now dynamically allocated. This change also allows removing crash_elf_data structure. Signed-off-by: AKASHI

[PATCH 5/7] x86: kexec_file: lift CRASH_MAX_RANGES limit on crash_mem buffer

2018-02-26 Thread AKASHI Takahiro
While CRASH_MAX_RANGES (== 16) seems to be good enough, fixed-number array is not a good idea in general. In this patch, size of crash_mem buffer is calculated as before and the buffer is now dynamically allocated. This change also allows removing crash_elf_data structure. Signed-off-by: AKASHI