Re: Edited kexec_load(2) [kexec_file_load()] man page for review

[Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 09:14:03PM +0000, Scot Doyle wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2015, Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 04:49:34PM +0100, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> > > Hello Vivek,
> > > 
> > > >> I've made various adjustments to the page in the light of your comments
> > > >> above. Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for following it up and improving kexec man page.
> > > 
> > > You're welcome. So, by now, I've made quite a lot of changes
> > > (including adding a number of cases under ERRORS). I think the revised
> > > kexec_load/kexec_file_load page is pretty much ready to go, but would
> > > you be willing to give the text below a check over first?
> > > 
> > 
> > Hi Michael,
> > 
> > I had a quick look and it looks good to me.
> > 
> > Thanks
> > Vivek
> 
> When I tested, kexec_file_load required CONFIG_RELOCATABLE. Is the same 
> true for kexec_load? Would it make sense to note this in the man pages 
> along with the need for CONFIG_KEXEC_FILE, etc? Or as an error message?

Hmm.., I can't see an explicity dependency between RELOCATABLE and
KEXEC. Both KEXEC and KEXEC_FILE should be able to load a kernel
even if it had RELOCATABLE=n.

Just that kernel will run from the address it has been built for.

Thanks
Vivek