| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20070215142124.4a6733fc.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 14:21:24 -0800 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: Corey Minyard <minyard@....org> Cc: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>, Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] ipmi: add new IPMI nmi watchdog handling On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 09:49:15 -0600 Corey Minyard <minyard@....org> wrote: > So I see the following options besides what's already there: > > 1) add asm/kdebug.h and DIE_NMI_POST to everything that might have an > IPMI implementation. > 2) use CONFIG_X86 to tell if NMI will work, since that's the only thing > it will work on at the present. > > I don't have any way to know how different systems have implemented that > feature, so I can't actually implement it for the various architectures > (plus I don't have any of those boards). So maybe #2 is the best? I tend to think that #1 is the best option - it keeps things consistent and it gives arch/board maintainers a framework in which to add the support code at their leisure. But it's something which would be best worked through with the affected arch maintainers, please. Which architectures are we talking about here? ia64 and ppc? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists