[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTim4fG0-F0+E-DHa4=XGdk1rFbRA68nvt9bfURiK@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 13:43:14 -0800
From: Aaron Durbin <adurbin@...gle.com>
To: Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc: Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, San Mehat <san@...gle.com>,
Duncan Laurie <dlaurie@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tim Hockin <thockin@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] Add oops notification chain.
On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 1:36 PM, Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org> wrote:
> On 01/25/2011 03:01 PM, Mike Waychison wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 6:06 PM, Greg KH<greg@...ah.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 04:24:39PM -0800, Mike Waychison wrote:
>>>>
>>>> From: Aaron Durbin<adurbin@...gle.com>
>>>>
>>>> Later firmware patches in this series would like to be able to be
>>>> notified whenever an oops occurs on the system, so that it can be
>>>> recorded in the boot log.
>>>>
>>>> This patch introduces a notifier_block called "oops_notifier_list"
>>>> so that drivers can register to get called whenever an Oops is
>>>> triggered.
>>>
>>> But we already have a panic notifier list. Why create a new one?
>>> What's wrong with the existing one that doesn't work properly for you?
>>
>> AFAICT, the panic notifier list doesn't get called on oops.
>
> Have you tried playing with panic_on_oops ?
Yes. We actually run in that setup. However, oops != panic. They are 2
distinct events. Sometimes we panic without the oops under certain
situations. That is why it is desirable to have 2 distinct events.
>
> Jeff
>
>
>
--
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