Re: [PATCH v6 06/10] memblock: introduce MEMBLOCK_NODUMP flag

[Baoquan He]

On 09/20/26 at 04:00pm, Wandun wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/20/26 11:33, Baoquan He wrote:
> > On 09/19/26 at 10:11am, Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >> On Fri, Sep 18, 2026 at 04:08:10PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
> >>> On 09/02/26 at 03:31pm, Wandun Chen wrote:
> > ...snip... 
> >>>> +/**
> >>>> + * memblock_mark_nodump - Mark a memory region with flag MEMBLOCK_NODUMP.
> >>>> + * @base: the base phys addr of the region
> >>>> + * @size: the size of the region
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * Mark the region as not to be included in crash dumps.
> >>>> + *
> >>>> + * Return: 0 on success, -errno on failure.
> >>>> + */
> >>>> +int __init_memblock memblock_mark_nodump(phys_addr_t base, phys_addr_t size)
> >>>       ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^
> >>> Is it impossible to use at runtime even thought it claims to be generic?
> >>
> >> This should only happen at boot.
> >>
> >> Allowing modifications of memblock properties in runtime is a can of worms
> >> I don't want to open.
> > 
> > Thank you. This is why I said this can't be claimed as a generic way to
> > mark memory region as no dump. The generic way I'd like to see is
> > at any time of system we can mark any unwanted memory region as no dump.
> > And it won't impact the behaviour of the current system.
> 
> Thanks Mike for the explanation and Baoquan for the suggestion.
> I'll drop the "generic" related description in the next version.
> 
> 
> Baoquan, by the way, patch 2 is still awaiting review. It rewrites
> the riscv side of the code that patch 3 (which you've acked) then
> folds into the weak defaults, if you could take a look at it too,
> that would be very helpful.

I checked and looks good, I have added ACK. While RISC-V people can hold
it anytime if they have concern.