Re: [Patch 0/7] Implement crashkernel=auto

From: Andi Kleen
Date: Fri Aug 07 2009 - 17:03:19 EST


> As an initial approximation I would use a 32nd of low memory.

That means a 1TB machine will have a 32GB crash kernel.

Surely that's excessive?!?

It would be repeating all the same mistakes people made with hash tables
several years ago.

>
> That can be written to (with enough privileges when no crash kernel is
> loaded) reduce the amount of memory reserved by the crash kernel.
>
> Bernhard does that sound useful to you?
>
> Amerigo does that seem reasonable?

It doesn't sound reasonable to Andi.

Why do you even want to grow the crash kernel that much? Is there
any real problem with a 64-128MB crash kernel?

-Andi
>

--
ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/