From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756708AbYDSADy (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:03:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752588AbYDSADr (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:03:47 -0400 Received: from yw-out-2324.google.com ([74.125.46.28]:27717 "EHLO yw-out-2324.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752526AbYDSADq (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:03:46 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=femrVXsNlNUV+bO55BPo7Dr7Szh+PZfjPxWFltsGlTwCD9/6+5BFMbfTgR/TZmT1+7q/EGFEHTHvxyEchRK1LZx/ITOBiK/bmgKjOfF6elSLPLCsbg+fjiSwp89CdeVx14CL+fNZSKC1MzzvR7iURLxrLyt521V3c/wnZnRYhI4= Message-ID: <86802c440804181703m35ce9862u9a872ca4f6829ba9@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:03:34 -0700 From: "Yinghai Lu" To: "Andrew Morton" Subject: Re: x86: memtest bootparam Cc: yhlu.kernel.send@gmail.com, mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20080418163226.1d8f2a62.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <200804181717.m3IHHicT031344@hera.kernel.org> <20080418145202.c96460a2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <86802c440804181507t4baf6c4dl1a68f89d3d7ce47c@mail.gmail.com> <20080418163226.1d8f2a62.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:07:46 -0700 > "Yinghai Lu" wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 2:52 PM, Andrew Morton > > wrote: > > > On Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:17:44 GMT > > > Linux Kernel Mailing List wrote: > > > > > > > Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=c64df70793a9c344874eb4af19f85e0662d2d3ee > > > > Commit: c64df70793a9c344874eb4af19f85e0662d2d3ee > > > > Parent: 9b967106da0357ef8b08847dce35584a04134f20 > > > > Author: Yinghai Lu > > > > AuthorDate: Fri Mar 21 18:56:19 2008 -0700 > > > > Committer: Ingo Molnar > > > > CommitDate: Thu Apr 17 17:41:21 2008 +0200 > > > > > > > > x86: memtest bootparam > > > > > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > > + memtest= [KNL,X86_64] Enable memtest > > > > + Format: > > > > + range: 0,4 : pattern number > > > > + default : 0 > > > > > > OK. Did the new memtest feature get documented anywhere, btw? I'm only > > > vaguely aware of its existence. > > > > need one text file in Documentation ? > > Well if there was a single CONFIG_MEMTEST then it would probably be > sufficent to document it all within the Kconfig help for that option. > > But there isn't a CONFIG_MEMTEST. It appears that the presence or absence > of the memtest feature is controlled by CONFIG_MEMTEST_BOOTPARAM which > makes no sense at all! > > > > > These seem pointless. Why not just unconditionally implement memtest=? > > > All the code for that should be __init anyway so we're hardly saving > > > anything here. > > > > also > > for big box, like 64g above, that will take a while. > > So... such users shouldn't add the memtest= boot parameter? > > > I'd suggest the following: > > - Add a CONFIG_MEMTEST. No other config variable needed. > > - Put all the memtest code inside #ifdef CONFIG_MEMTEST. > > - As part of that memtest code, implement the memtest= boot option > > - Make the memtest feature default to "off" if memtest= was not provided. > > > That's all very simple and conventional? ok, I will produce one patch. it will be memtest=0 ==> disable memtest=4 ==> will run 4 test pattern YH