Re: [PATCH] crash: Default to CRASH_DUMP=n when support for it is unlikely

Baoquan He <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel,gmane.linux.ports.ppc64.devel,gmane.linux.kernel.kexec,gmane.linux.kernel
Message-ID <Zs1wpHxfTcwKr517@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
On 08/23/24 at 08:16pm, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hi Geert,
> 
> On Fri, 2024-08-23 at 15:13 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > IMHO CRASH_DUMP should just default to n, like most kernel options, as
> > it enables non-trivial extra functionality: the kernel source tree has
> > more than 100 locations that check if CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP is enabled.
> 
> I guess we should then revert that part of Baoquan's original patch.
> 
> > What is so special about CRASH_DUMP, that it should be enabled by
> > default?
> 
> Let's ask Baoquan who made the original change to enable CRASH_DUMP by default.

Sorry for late reply.

It's me who enabled it by default when I clean up the messy Kconfig items
related to kexec/kdump. Before the clean up, CONFIG_CRASH_DUMP only
controlled a very small file including sevearl functions and macro
definitions. But kernel codes took CRASH_DUMP as switch of kdump.

About why it's enabled by default, as Michael has explained in another
thread, distros usualy needs to enable it by default because vmcore
dumping is a very important feature on servers, even guest instances. 
Even though kdump codes are enabled to built in, not providing
crashkernel= value won't make vmcore dumping take effect, it won't cost
system resources in that case.

Thanks
Baoquan
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.