linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] kexec: introduce kexec

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]

Date:	Thu, 22 Nov 2012 09:47:46 -0800
From:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To:	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
CC:	Daniel Kiper <daniel.kiper@...cle.com>, andrew.cooper3@...rix.com,
	jbeulich@...e.com, konrad.wilk@...cle.com, mingo@...hat.com,
	tglx@...utronix.de, x86@...nel.org, kexec@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
	xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] kexec: introduce kexec_ops struct

The other thing that should be considered here is how utterly 
preposterous the notion of doing in-guest crash dumping is in a system 
that contains a hypervisor.  The reason for kdump is that on bare metal 
there are no other options, but in a hypervisor system the right thing 
should be for the hypervisor to do the dump (possibly spawning a clean 
I/O domain if the I/O domain is necessary to access the media.)

There is absolutely no reason to have a crashkernel sitting around in 
each guest, consuming memory, and possibly get corrupt.

	-hpa

-- 
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

--
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/