[PATCH 0/3] ARM: Use generic interface to simplify crashkernel reservation

[Jinjie Ruan]

On 2024/7/9 22:06, Baoquan He wrote:
> On 07/09/24 at 07:06pm, Jinjie Ruan wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2024/7/9 18:39, Baoquan He wrote:
>>> On 07/09/24 at 05:50pm, Jinjie Ruan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2024/7/9 17:29, Baoquan He wrote:
>>>>> On 07/08/24 at 09:33pm, Jinjie Ruan wrote:
>>>>>> Currently, x86, arm64, riscv and loongarch has been switched to generic
>>>>>> crashkernel reservation. Also use generic interface to simplify crashkernel
>>>>>> reservation for arm32, and fix two bugs by the way.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure if this is a good idea. I added the generic reservation
>>>>> itnerfaces for ARCH which support crashkernel=,high|low and normal
>>>>> crashkernel reservation, with this, the code can be simplified a lot.
>>>>> However, arm32 doesn't support crashkernel=,high, I am not sure if it's
>>>>> worth taking the change, most importantly, if it will cause
>>>>> misunderstanding or misoperation.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, arm32 doesn't support crashkernel=,high.
>>>>
>>>> However, a little enhancement to the generic code (please see the first
>>>> patch), the generic reservation interfaces can also be applicable to
>>>> architectures that do not support "high" such as arm32, and it can also
>>>> simplify the code (please see the third patch).
>>>
>>> Yeah, I can see the code is simplified. When you specified
>>> 'crashkernel=xM,high', do you think what should be warn out? Because
>>> it's an unsupported syntax on arm32, we should do something to print out
>>> appropriate message.
>>
>> Yes, you are right! In this patch it will print "crashkernel high memory
>> reservation failed." message and out for arm32 if you specify
> 
> That message may mislead people to believe crashkernel=,high is
> supported but reservation is failed, then a bug need be filed for this?
> We may expect a message telling this syntax is not supported on this
> ARCH.

"CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX >= CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX" indicate that the arm32 does
not support "crashkernel=,high", I wonder if this is generic for similar
architecture. If so, the first patch can print such as
"crashkernel=,high is not supported on this ARCH" message.

> 
>> 'crashkernel=xM,high because "CRASH_ADDR_LOW_MAX" and
>> "CRASH_ADDR_HIGH_MAX" is identical for arm32. And it should also warn
>> out for other similar architecture.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
>