From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756913AbaEPK62 (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 May 2014 06:58:28 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f51.google.com ([74.125.83.51]:64269 "EHLO mail-ee0-f51.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756583AbaEPK60 (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 May 2014 06:58:26 -0400 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/8] OF: Introduce DT overlay support. To: Geert Uytterhoeven , Pantelis Antoniou Cc: Rob Herring , Stephen Warren , Matt Porter , Koen Kooi , Alison Chaiken , Dinh Nguyen , Jan Lubbe , Alexander Sverdlin , Michael Stickel , Guenter Roeck , Dirk Behme , Alan Tull , Sascha Hauer , Michael Bohan , Ionut Nicu , Michal Simek , Matt Ranostay , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Pete Popov , Dan Malek , Georgi Vlaev In-Reply-To: References: <1396615441-29630-1-git-send-email-pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> <1396615441-29630-3-git-send-email-pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> <20140514100856.5198DC4153D@trevor.secretlab.ca> Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 11:58:14 +0100 Message-Id: <20140516105814.3EA3FC403C2@trevor.secretlab.ca> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 15 May 2014 09:20:24 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Pantelis, > > On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 9:12 AM, Pantelis Antoniou > wrote: > >> We also need to think about kexec. Kexec works by sucking the live tree > >> out of the kernel and creating a .dtb from it to pass to the new kernel. > >> What will the rules be when kexecing? Do all the overlays need to be > >> removed, or does the kernel get the tree with all the overlays applied > >> (in which case none of the overlays can be removed on the other side of > >> kexec). > > > > We can add a sysfs attribute that configures whether overlays are reverted before > > kexec or not. I can't really tell which is the correct option, so let's allow the > > policy up to user-space. > > Kexec'ing into a new kernel doesn't change the hardware, so IMHO the > in-kernel DT should not change. Conceptually though, if overlays are applied then the new kernel has a different tree from the old one. If the overlay is hotpluggable, then after the kexec, the new kernel would no longer be able to unplug the overlay if it uses the current state of the tree instead of pulling the overlays off first. g.