[PATCH v2] makedumpfile: add parameters to update_cyclic_region

[Baoquan He]

On 11/26/13 at 03:12am, Atsushi Kumagai wrote:
> Hello Baoquan,
> 
> On 2013/11/26 11:53:34, kexec <kexec-bounces at lists.infradead.org> wrote:
> > On 11/25/13 at 01:33pm, HATAYAMA Daisuke wrote:
> > > (2013/11/25 11:31), Baoquan He wrote:
> > > >Hi HATAYAMA and Atsushi,
> > > >
> > > >I think v2 is better than v1, since update_cyclic_region can be used
> > > >with a more flexible calling.
> > > >
> > > >What's your opinion about this?
> > > >
> > > >On 11/23/13 at 05:29pm, Baoquan He wrote:
> > > 
> > > Thanks for your patch. The bug is caused by my patch set for creating a
> > > whole part of 1st bitmap before entering cyclic process.
> > > 
> > > I think v1 is better than v2. The update_cyclic_range() call relevant
> > > to this regression is somewhat special compared to other calls; it is
> > > the almost only call that doesn't need to perform filtering processing.
> > > To fix this bug, please make the patch so as not to affect the other calls,
> > > in order to keep change as small as possible.
> > 
> > OK, if you think so. But I still think update_cyclic_region is a little
> > weird, its name doesn't match its functionality, this confuses code
> > reviewers. And it does something unnecessary somewhere. If it's
> > possible, I would rather take out the create_1st_bitmap_cyclic and
> > exclude_unnecessary_pages_cyclic, and call them explicitly where they
> > are really needed. Surely we can make a little change in both of them,
> > E.g add a parameter pfn to them, then we can also judge like
> > update_cyclic_region has done:
> > 
> >         if (is_cyclic_region(pfn))
> >                 return TRUE;
> > 
> > If you insist on v1 is a better idea, I will repost based on it, but keep
> > my personal opinion.
> 
> I also prefer v1 because the usage of update_cyclic_region_without_exclude() is
> definite and understandable while v2's update_cyclic_region() is complicated.
> 
> On the other hand, I agree with your opinion, so could you post a cleanup patch
> separately from v1 patch ?

Hi Atsushi,

Yeah, you are right, v1 is better. Then we can wait for HATAYAMA's cleanup
patch. I know you are goint to release v1.5.5.

Baoquan
Thanks


> 
> 
> Thanks
> Atsushi Kumagai
> 
> > Baoquan
> > Thanks
> > 
> > > 
> > > -- 
> > > Thanks.
> > > HATAYAMA, Daisuke
> > > 
> > > 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > kexec mailing list
> > > kexec at lists.infradead.org
> > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > kexec mailing list
> > kexec at lists.infradead.org
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> kexec mailing list
> kexec at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec