[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <04EAB7311EE43145B2D3536183D1A84454B06310@GSjpTKYDCembx31.service.hitachi.net>
Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2016 04:23:59 +0000
From: 河合英宏 / KAWAI,HIDEHIRO
<hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com>
To: "'minyard@....org'" <minyard@....org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Mingarelli <thomas.mingarelli@....com>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>
CC: "openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 2/3] ipmi/watchdog: Use nmi_panic() when kernel panics
in NMI handler
Hi Corey,
Thanks for the review.
> Sure, this is a good idea.
>
> Acked-by: Corey Minyard <cminyard@...sta.com>
>
> Note that nmi_panic() came in commit 1717f2096b5 (panic, x86: Fix
> re-entrance problem due to panic on NMI) and then the regs field
> was added in the commit you reference.
Yes. So, I'll change the description to more proper one.
> Do you want me to add this to the IPMI queue or do you have another
> way to get this patch into the kernel?
I don't have another way, and I don't know how cross-subsystem
patch set should be handled.
I think it would be better this patch set is managed by one person
because both PATCH 2/3 and 3/3 depend on 1/3.
Thanks,
--
Hidehiro Kawai
Hitachi, Ltd. Research & Development Group
Powered by blists - more mailing lists