From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758579AbYFTOhm (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:37:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755869AbYFTOhf (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:37:35 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:55631 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755778AbYFTOhe (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Jun 2008 10:37:34 -0400 Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 16:37:17 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Bernhard Walle Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yhlu.kernel@gmail.com, the arch/x86 maintainers Subject: Re: [PATCH] Unify crashkernel reservation for 32 and 64 bit Message-ID: <20080620143717.GH8135@elte.hu> References: <1213969102-17400-1-git-send-email-bwalle@suse.de> <20080620135645.GD8135@elte.hu> <20080620160223.4a0f1dd8@halley.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080620160223.4a0f1dd8@halley.suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Bernhard Walle wrote: > > famous last words :) > > > > can you see any functionality difference between them? If yes, that > > should be declared. > > The only difference was the calculation of memory -- it's more > complicated on i386 because of high memory support, so that was > outsourced to an inline function. However, because the highmem is in > > #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHMEM > #endif > > and CONFIG_HIGHMEM is off on x86-64, that doesn't matter. Do you see > another issue? i can see no issue, i was just was confused a bit by the "more or less" qualifier. I've applied your patch to tip/x86/mpparse, thanks Bernhard. > I tested it on both x86-64 and i386, with CONFIG_KEXEC on and off (so > that it compiles). that's always good to know - it's useful to know the amount and scope of testing - i've put this into the changelog. Ingo