[Fwd: [PATCH] PPC64: large INITRD causes kernel not to boot]

[Olaf Hering]

 On Mon, Aug 08, Mark Bellon wrote:

> The original code started non-zero too [don't know why]. Yes, if 
> everything was correct and the claims where proper one could always 
> start at zero.

make sure to also claim the range from _start to _end. The firmware on
my B50 doesnt claim the client memrange.

> I've got several platforms where the claim will (incorrectly) succeed 
> below the computed location. This coding insures that no matter what the 
> firmware thinks is right (or wrong) the claiming starts at a safe place. 
> Insurance?

What is wrong with allocations on low addresses?

> On top of that it's just a waste of time. In really huge INITRD handling 
> this adds unnecessary boot latency.

I could not load a 10Mb file via network on a POWER4 LPAR. Maybe your
case is a huge ELF memsize. On what system do you see the failure?