On 04.09.2020 16:47, Igor Druzhinin wrote: > The referenced commit is not unrelated - it's the commit introducing the > access > causing kexec transition to fail. But I can add another one pointing to the > mapping > of ACPI tables that was supposed to fix the failure caused by the first one.
Oh, okay, I finally understand. The purpose of the change is unrelated, it's what get_acpi_srat_table() does which causes the problem. Hopefully this will be more obvious with the other commit also referenced. How about additionally changing "which is now a requirement after" to "which is now a requirement in order for ... to work" or "which is a prerequisite for ... actually functioning" or some such? Jan
