From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Harald Hoyer Subject: Re: [PATCH] Change the implementation of action_on_fail Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:31:08 +0200 Message-ID: <51F91FAC.50706@redhat.com> References: <73cc07330929ba4b226f2a0623a5459cd42932b9.1374574542.git.bhe@redhat.com> <51F91A14.4020601@redhat.com> <20130731142050.GG31151@redhat.com> <51F91E75.3070102@redhat.com> <20130731142905.GH31151@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130731142905.GH31151-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: initramfs-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Vivek Goyal Cc: Baoquan He , initramfs-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, WANG Chao On 07/31/2013 04:29 PM, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 04:25:57PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: > > [..] >>>> I like it. >>>> >>>> Vivek: would that solve one of your systemd problems? >>> >>> Hi Harald, >>> >>> Yes this should solve one of the problems of being able to call emergency >>> shell from kdump module. >>> >>> I was thinking of modirying emergency.service on the fly and then reload >>> systemd config. But I guess this solution is simpler. >>> >>> It also takes away the flexibility of being able to specify "reboot" or >>> some other actions as failure actions. But nobody as asked for those >>> yet. >>> >>> So yes, agreed, this will solve atleast one problem. So makes sense >>> to take it in. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Vivek >>> >> >> pushed, thanks! > > Hi Harald, > > Do you still like the parameter name "rd.action_on_fail". I think a new > parameter say, "rd.no_emergecny_shell" might make more sense to reflect > what we are doing. > > If you like it, I can request bao to post a new patch and make appropriate > changes. > > Thanks > Vivek > You can add the rd.no_emergency_shell parser in your kdump module and touch the marker file. I think that gives you more flexibility for runtime decisions. You can just add and remove that file on will.