On Fri, 25 May 2018 15:00:13 -0500
ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
>[...]
> The ultimate point is that the absolute best we can do is to run a
> kernel in memory that we never use for anything else and then we have a
> fighting chance of getting the system working and getting a re
Petr Tesarik writes:
> V Thu, 24 May 2018 11:34:05 -0500
> ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) napsáno:
>
>> Petr Tesarik writes:
>>
>> 2> On Thu, 24 May 2018 09:49:05 +0800
>> > Dave Young wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Petr,
>> >>
>> >> On 05/23/18 at 10:22pm, Petr Tesarik wrote:
>> >>[...]
V Thu, 24 May 2018 11:34:05 -0500
ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) napsáno:
> Petr Tesarik writes:
>
> 2> On Thu, 24 May 2018 09:49:05 +0800
> > Dave Young wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Petr,
> >>
> >> On 05/23/18 at 10:22pm, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> >>[...]
> >> > In short, if one size fits no
Hi Eric,
On 05/24/18 at 11:41am, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Dave Young writes:
>
> > Hi Eric,
> > On 05/23/18 at 10:53am, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >> Dave Young writes:
> >>
> >> > [snip]
> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > +config CRASHKERNEL_DEFAULT_THRESHOLD_MB
> >> >> > + int "System memory
Dave Young writes:
> Hi Eric,
> On 05/23/18 at 10:53am, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Dave Young writes:
>>
>> > [snip]
>> >
>> >> >
>> >> > +config CRASHKERNEL_DEFAULT_THRESHOLD_MB
>> >> > + int "System memory size threshold for kdump memory default
>> >> > reserving"
>> >> > + de
Petr Tesarik writes:
2> On Thu, 24 May 2018 09:49:05 +0800
> Dave Young wrote:
>
>> Hi Petr,
>>
>> On 05/23/18 at 10:22pm, Petr Tesarik wrote:
>>[...]
>> > In short, if one size fits none, what good is it to hardcode that "one
>> > size" into the kernel image?
>>
>> I agreed with all the thi
On Thu, 24 May 2018 15:26:27 +0800
Dave Young wrote:
> On 05/24/18 at 08:57am, Petr Tesarik wrote:
>[...]
> > What is "a very minimal initrd"? Last time I had to make a significant
> > adjustment to the estimation for openSUSE, this was caused by growing
> > user-space requirements (systemd in th
On 05/24/18 at 03:56pm, Dave Young wrote:
> > > > Instead of setting aside a significant chunk of memory nobody can use,
> > > > [...] reserve a significant chunk of memory that the kernel is prevented
> > > > from using [...], but applications are free to use it.
> > >
> > > That works great, bec
> > > Instead of setting aside a significant chunk of memory nobody can use,
> > > [...] reserve a significant chunk of memory that the kernel is prevented
> > > from using [...], but applications are free to use it.
> >
> > That works great, because user space pages are filtered out in the
> > co
On 05/24/18 at 03:26pm, Dave Young wrote:
> On 05/24/18 at 08:57am, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 May 2018 09:49:05 +0800
> > Dave Young wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Petr,
> > >
> > > On 05/23/18 at 10:22pm, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> > >[...]
> > > > In short, if one size fits none, what good is it to h
On 05/24/18 at 08:57am, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2018 09:49:05 +0800
> Dave Young wrote:
>
> > Hi Petr,
> >
> > On 05/23/18 at 10:22pm, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> >[...]
> > > In short, if one size fits none, what good is it to hardcode that "one
> > > size" into the kernel image?
> >
On 05/24/18 at 08:57am, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> On Thu, 24 May 2018 09:49:05 +0800
> Dave Young wrote:
>
> > Hi Petr,
> >
> > On 05/23/18 at 10:22pm, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> >[...]
> > > In short, if one size fits none, what good is it to hardcode that "one
> > > size" into the kernel image?
> >
On Thu, 24 May 2018 09:49:05 +0800
Dave Young wrote:
> Hi Petr,
>
> On 05/23/18 at 10:22pm, Petr Tesarik wrote:
>[...]
> > In short, if one size fits none, what good is it to hardcode that "one
> > size" into the kernel image?
>
> I agreed with all the things that we can not know the exact me
Hi Petr,
On 05/23/18 at 10:22pm, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> On Wed, 23 May 2018 10:53:55 -0500
> ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
>
> > Dave Young writes:
> >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > >> >
> > >> > +config CRASHKERNEL_DEFAULT_THRESHOLD_MB
> > >> > + int "System memory size thr
Hi Eric,
On 05/23/18 at 10:53am, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Dave Young writes:
>
> > [snip]
> >
> >> >
> >> > +config CRASHKERNEL_DEFAULT_THRESHOLD_MB
> >> > +int "System memory size threshold for kdump memory default
> >> > reserving"
> >> > +depends on CRASH_CORE
> >> > +
On Wed, 23 May 2018 10:53:55 -0500
ebied...@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> Dave Young writes:
>
> > [snip]
> >
> >> >
> >> > +config CRASHKERNEL_DEFAULT_THRESHOLD_MB
> >> > +int "System memory size threshold for kdump memory default
> >> > reserving"
> >> > +depen
Dave Young writes:
> [snip]
>
>> >
>> > +config CRASHKERNEL_DEFAULT_THRESHOLD_MB
>> > + int "System memory size threshold for kdump memory default reserving"
>> > + depends on CRASH_CORE
>> > + default 0
>> > + help
>> > +CRASHKERNEL_DEFAULT_MB is used as default crashkernel value if
>>
[snip]
> >
> > +config CRASHKERNEL_DEFAULT_THRESHOLD_MB
> > + int "System memory size threshold for kdump memory default reserving"
> > + depends on CRASH_CORE
> > + default 0
> > + help
> > + CRASHKERNEL_DEFAULT_MB is used as default crashkernel value if
> > + the system memory
On 05/21/18 at 12:02pm, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2018 10:53:37 +0800 Dave Young wrote:
>
> > This is a rework of the crashkernel=auto patches back to 2009 although
> > I'm not sure if below is the last version of the old effort:
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/12/61
> > https://lwn.
On 05/21/18 at 12:02pm, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 21 May 2018 10:53:37 +0800 Dave Young wrote:
>
> > This is a rework of the crashkernel=auto patches back to 2009 although
> > I'm not sure if below is the last version of the old effort:
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/12/61
> > https://lwn.
On Mon, 21 May 2018 10:53:37 +0800 Dave Young wrote:
> This is a rework of the crashkernel=auto patches back to 2009 although
> I'm not sure if below is the last version of the old effort:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/12/61
> https://lwn.net/Articles/345344/
>
> I changed the original design,
This is a rework of the crashkernel=auto patches back to 2009 although
I'm not sure if below is the last version of the old effort:
https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/12/61
https://lwn.net/Articles/345344/
I changed the original design, instead of adding the auto reserve logic
in code, in this patch jus
22 matches
Mail list logo
