[PATCH] kexec_load manpage

[Simon Horman]

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 02:25:40PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 09:14:17PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 11:38:02PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 04:56:24PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk wrote:
> > > > Hey Andi,
> > > > 
> > > > I'd like to push this page out the door, but I'm blocked doing so
> > > > until I hear back from you regarding the question below (plus a new
> > > > version of the page, if needed please).
> > > 
> > > Probably. Eric should know.
> > > 
> > > Frankly without an header the syscall is pretty much unusable
> > > for normal programs anyways, so I gave up on this.
> > 
> > I'm not sure that I ever understood the impasse over the header.
> 
> It's basically: should kexec_load only be used from kexec(8)
> or is it a generally available syscall.
> 
> If the former is true no header or manpage is needed.
> For the later both are.

Magnus Damm is interested in having a kexec-tools module for busybox [1].
And I suspect that would be somewhat less tedious to implement
if kexec was a generally available syscall.

[1] http://tree.celinuxforum.org/pipermail/celinux-dev/2010-October/002057.html