[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091117235627.GA13469@dvomlehn-lnx2.corp.sa.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:56:27 -0500
From: David VomLehn <dvomlehn@...co.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Cc: dedekind1@...il.com, Marco Stornelli <marco.stornelli@...il.com>,
Simon Kagstrom <simon.kagstrom@...insight.net>,
linux-embedded@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
dwm2@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mpm@...enic.com,
paul.gortmaker@...driver.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] panic-note: Annotation from user space for panics
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 10:45:43AM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
...
> Why not use the kdump hook? If you handle a kernel panic that way
> you get enhanced reliability and full user space support. All in a hook
> that is already present and already works.
I'm a big fan of avoiding reinvention of the wheel--if I can use something
already present, I will. However, I'm not clear about how much of the problem
I'm addressing will be solved by using a kdump hook. If I understand
correctly, you'd still need a pseudo-file somewhere to actually get the data
from user space to kernel space. *Then* you could use a kdump hook to
transfer the data to flash or some memory area that will be retained across
boots. Is this the approach to which you were referring? If so, I have a
couple more questions:
1. In what ways would this be better than, say, a panic_notifier?
2. Where would you suggest tying in? (Particularly since not all architectures
currently support kdump)
> Eric
David VL
--
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