linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] kexec: do not call kmsg

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4ECF680C.7060606@redhat.com>
Date:	Fri, 25 Nov 2011 18:03:56 +0800
From:	Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
To:	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
CC:	ebiederm@...ssion.com, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec: do not call kmsg_dump in crashdump

On 11/25/2011 05:32 PM, Cong Wang wrote:

> On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com> wrote:
>> mtd/ram oops dumper will make more functions envolved. In case crash kexec,
>> we should avoid kmsg dumper to ensure crashdump success.
>>
>> kill kmsg_dump callback while crash dumping
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/1/33


Thanks for give the link. So it's intend to be that.

I'm still confused with the KMSG_DUMP_KEXEC.

crash_kexec()
	kmsg_dump(KMSG_DUMP_KEXEC)
kmsg_dump(KMSG_DUMP_PANIC)

Looks like it's equal to original logic, isn't it?

kmsg_dump(anything);
crash_kexec()

So why intruduce KMSG_DUMP_KEXEC? why not just kmsg_dump before crash_kexec?

thoughts?

-- 
Thanks
Dave
--
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/