[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56D524CC.40903@roeck-us.net>
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 21:12:44 -0800
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: 河合英宏 / KAWAI,HIDEHIRO
<hidehiro.kawai.ez@...achi.com>,
"'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
On 02/29/2016 08:23 PM, 河合英宏 / KAWAI,HIDEHIRO wrote:
> 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.
>
We'll need an Ack from someone with authority over kernel/panic.c.
If someone sends an Ack, the series can go through IPMI (or watchdog).
It might be easier though if Andrew would take the entire series.
Guenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists