[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080423123233.GA23066@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 08:32:33 -0400
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>
To: Takenori Nagano <t-nagano@...jp.nec.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, kdb@....sgi.com,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org, Keith Owens <kaos@....com.au>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>, greg@...ah.com,
bwalle@...e.de, k-miyoshi@...jp.nec.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] add new notifier function ,take4
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 08:11:19PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
> Hi,
>
> changelog take3 -> take4
>
> - Rebased 2.6.25-mm1
> - Add a document
> - Add kdump on panic_notifier
>
> These patches add new notifier function and implement it to panic_notifier_list.
> We used the hardcoded notifier chain so far, but it was not flexible. New
> notifier is very flexible, because user can change a list of order by control files.
>
> And, third patch moves crash_kexec() to panic_notifier. It helps us to do
> something before taking a crash dump. It's useful for some RAS tools developer.
Hi Takenori,
What's the "something" which you want to do after panic and before kdump.
Can you please give a concrete example. We have talked about this quite
a few times but nothing concrete has come out so far, except a generic
statement that it helps "RAS tool developers".
The only thing we could think of was debuggers (kdb and kgdb) and one easy
solution is that debuggers/users can put a break point at panic() instead
of introducing this infrastructure.
Thanks
Vivek
--
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