On 04/01/16 at 02:25pm, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
[snip]
> Well, if we want to remove it, we then need to sort out a method of
> specifying a limit on the address - where platforms physical memory
> bridges the 4GB CPU-accessible limit, the crashkernel region must be
> allocated below that
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 09:27:08AM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:05:30PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 06:09:22PM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> > > On 30/03/2016:09:46:38 AM, Dave Young wrote:
> > > > Hi, Russell
> > > >
> > > > A
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 02:05:30PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 06:09:22PM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> > On 30/03/2016:09:46:38 AM, Dave Young wrote:
> > > Hi, Russell
> > >
> > > A long standing issue, but nobody tried to do it. Thank you for bringing
> >
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 06:09:22PM +0530, Pratyush Anand wrote:
> On 30/03/2016:09:46:38 AM, Dave Young wrote:
> > Hi, Russell
> >
> > A long standing issue, but nobody tried to do it. Thank you for bringing up.
> >
> > On 03/29/16 at 11:10am, Russell King wrote:
> > > When the kernel
On 30/03/2016:09:46:38 AM, Dave Young wrote:
> Hi, Russell
>
> A long standing issue, but nobody tried to do it. Thank you for bringing up.
>
> On 03/29/16 at 11:10am, Russell King wrote:
> > When the kernel crashkernel parameter is specified with just a size, we
> > are supposed to allocate a
Hi, Russell
A long standing issue, but nobody tried to do it. Thank you for bringing up.
On 03/29/16 at 11:10am, Russell King wrote:
> When the kernel crashkernel parameter is specified with just a size, we
> are supposed to allocate a region from RAM to store the crashkernel.
> However, ARM
