[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2d24ea70-e315-beb5-0028-683880c438be@igalia.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:34:13 -0300
From: "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>
To: Dave Young <dyoung@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, mcgrof@...nel.org,
keescook@...omium.org, yzaikin@...gle.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, feng.tang@...el.com,
siglesias@...lia.com, kernel@...ccoli.net,
kexec@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] panic: Allow printing extra panic information on
kdump
On 22/12/2021 08:45, Dave Young wrote:
> Hi Guilherme,
>
> Thanks for you patch. Could you add kexec list for any following up
> patches? This could change kdump behavior so let's see if any comments
> from kexec list.
>
> Kudos for the lore+lei tool so that I can catch this by seeing this
> coming into Andrews tree :)
Hi Dave, I'm really sorry for not adding the kexec list, I forgot. But I
will do next time for sure, my apologies. And thanks for taking a look
after you noticed that on lore, I appreciate your feedback!
> [...]
> People may enable kdump crashkernel and panic_print together but
> they are not aware the extra panic print could cause kdump not reliable
> (in theory). So at least some words in kernel-parameters.txt would
> help.
>
That makes sense, I'll improve that in a follow-up patch, how about
that? Indeed it's a good idea to let people be sure that panic_print
might affect kdump reliability, although I consider the risk to be
pretty low. And I'll loop the kexec list for sure!
Cheers,
Guilherme
Powered by blists - more mailing lists