From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758024AbXLLVfc (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:35:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751328AbXLLVfY (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:35:24 -0500 Received: from ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com ([166.70.28.69]:38074 "EHLO ebiederm.dsl.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750772AbXLLVfY (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2007 16:35:24 -0500 From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Neil Horman Cc: Andi Kleen , Yinghai Lu , Ben Woodard , Neil Horman , kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hbabu@us.ibm.com, Andi Kleen , tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec: force x86_64 arches to boot kdump kernels on boot cpu References: <20071211182254.GB10999@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20071211192434.GD10999@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <86802c440712111151t29acd38kf9fac8e41743f3e4@mail.gmail.com> <20071211205955.GF10999@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> <20071212142132.GC4889@bingen.suse.de> <20071212155515.GA29735@hmsendeavour.rdu.redhat.com> <20071212160722.GD4889@bingen.suse.de> <20071212202215.GB29735@hmsendeavour.rdu.redhat.com> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 14:32:02 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20071212202215.GB29735@hmsendeavour.rdu.redhat.com> (Neil Horman's message of "Wed, 12 Dec 2007 15:22:15 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Neil Horman writes: > I think this just leaves us with deciding on a mechanism for how to do > single-application quirks. I take Andi's point that adding a flag set to the > quirk data structure is a fine solution, but I'm really ok with static integers > in individual functions. Do we have consensus on how to handle that? I'm happy > either way, but I'd rather have agreement on how to handle it before I post > another iteration of this patch. As long as the solution is simple, small and concise I don't care. And since what will make Andi happy seems to meet those criteria, that should be fine. Eric