linux-kernel - RE: pstore/ramoops - why only collect a partial dmesg?

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: <8675f69c1643451b91f797b114dfc311@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 4 Jan 2022 18:46:01 +0000
From:   "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To:     "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>,
        "keescook@...omium.org" <keescook@...omium.org>,
        "anton@...msg.org" <anton@...msg.org>,
        "ccross@...roid.com" <ccross@...roid.com>
CC:     "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux-Fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Guilherme G. Piccoli" <kernel@...ccoli.net>
Subject: RE: pstore/ramoops - why only collect a partial dmesg?

> There lies the issue: if I set panic_print to dump all backtraces, task
> info and memory state in a panic event, that information + the
> panic/oops and some previous relevant stuff, does it all fit in the 2M
> chunk? Likely so, but *if it doesn't fit*, we may lose _exactly_ the
> most important piece, which is the panic cause.

That does change things ... I wonder how many megabytes you need
for a big system (hundreds of cores, thousands of tasks)!

This use case does look like it could use multiple chunks in ramoops.

-Tony