RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Description of problem:
The arch_default_crash_size function in kernel/kexec.c tries to figure out the automatic size to use for the crashkernel.  The existing calculation turns out to be independent of the system_ram -- it's always 135266304 (129M) for any reasonable values of system_ram.

A comment in the code indicates that the calculation is meant to use a 1:8192 ratio.  This could be done by changing the (1ULL<<23) to (1ULL<<13).

It's not clear that this should be the calculation or if it should be something else.  Larger memory systems will certainly consume more slab space and result in the 70% warning when running mkdumprd.


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
2.6.32-131.0.15.el6


How reproducible:
100%


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.
  
Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Since RHEL 6.2 External Beta has begun, and this bug remains
unresolved, it has been rejected as it is not proposed as
exception or blocker.

Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the
next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

Hi kdump developer, 

Any update for this bug?

--
Thanks,
Qiao

(In reply to Wayne H. Badger from comment #0)
> It's not clear that this should be the calculation or if it should be
> something else.  Larger memory systems will certainly consume more slab
> space and result in the 70% warning when running mkdumprd.

Hi,

Please let us know a use-case or reproducer where we can reproduce warning when running mkdumprd with current crash size allocation scheme.

~Pratyush

Closing , because it is working in current release as per comment 6.

The main part of this ticket was fixed in 2011.  In the 5 years since this ticket was created, we have not noticed additional issues with kdump related to this ticket.