[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTinwFt+KDKNEYP9MWQ7wGb9qk=E2Xa3RJB3+MJnN@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 15:53:55 -0800
From: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu, greg@...ah.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ying.huang@...el.com,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kmpark@...radead.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [concept & "good taste" review] persistent store
On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:11 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> There are two models I can think of:
>
> 1. a file where the head is automatically dropped as space requires.
> 2. a filesystem where the oldest files are automatically reclaimed.
>
> 1 has been implemented in actual systems, 2 is kind of a logical extension.
#2 sounds more applicable here (we have some multi-kilobyte
blobs of data, one from each kmsg_dumper invocation - and
it would seem useful to keep them as separate entities)
I'm not sure whether everyone would be happy with this. Imagine you
have a system that gets two OOPs, followed by a full panic - but that
the persistent store only has space for two of the three reports. I think
that most people would want the first OOPs and the panic ... i.e.
drop the middle bit, rather than the oldest bit.
-Tony
--
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