On 08/30/22 at 01:28pm, Yun Levi wrote: > Like crashk_res, Calling crash_exclude_mem_range function with > crashk_low_res area would need extra crash_mem range too. > Add one extra crash_mem range when crashk_low_res is used. > > Signed-off-by: Levi Yun <ppbuk5...@gmail.com> > --- > arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c > b/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c > index 889951291cc0..378aee04e7d4 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/machine_kexec_file.c > @@ -51,6 +51,9 @@ static int prepare_elf_headers(void **addr, unsigned long > *sz) > for_each_mem_range(i, &start, &end) > nr_ranges++; > > + if (crashk_low_res.end) > + nr_ranges++; /**< for exclusion of > crashkernel=size,low region */ > +
Right, excluding crashkernel region may cause memory region splitting, so we need extra slot for that. Meanwhile, can you fix above code comment mess? Otherwise, this looks good to me. Or we can add extra 2 slots like we do in x86, it just add another 16 bytes temporarily. > cmem = kmalloc(struct_size(cmem, ranges, nr_ranges), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!cmem) > return -ENOMEM; > -- > 2.35.1 > _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
