On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 19:32:46 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mel Gorman) wrote: > > > I wasn't even aware of this kernelcore thing. It's pretty nasty-looking. > > > yet another reminder that this code hasn't been properly reviewed in the > > > past year or three. > > > > Just now, I'm making memory-unplug patches with current MOVABLE_ZONE > > code. So, I might be the first user of it on ia64. > > > > Anyway, I'll try to fix it. > > > > Can you review this patch and see does it fix the problem please? There > was a second problem that showed up while testing this in relation to the > bootmem allocator assumptions about zone boundary alignment. I'll follow up > this mail with the patch in case you are seeing that problem. > > Subject: Fix parsing kernelcore boot option V2 > cmdline_parse_kernelcore() should return the next pointer of boot option > like memparse() doing. If not, it is cause of eternal loop on ia64 box. > This patch is for 2.6.21-rc6-mm1. This patch changes the kernelcore command > line parsing so that is compatible with both early_param() way of doing > things and IA64. > In my understanding, why ia64 doesn't use early_param() macro for mem= at el. is that it has to use mem= option at efi handling which is called before parse_early_param().
Current ia64's boot path is setup_arch() -> efi handling -> parse_early_param() -> numa handling -> pgdat/zone init kernelcore= option is just used at pgdat/zone initialization. (no arch dependent part...) So I think just adding == early_param("kernelcore",cmpdline_parse_kernelcore) == to ia64 is ok..... -Kame - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/