From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Akio Takebe Subject: Re: [Patch] Enable "sysrq c" handler for domU coredump Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 19:33:50 +0900 Message-ID: <52C6B555FA5977takebe_akio@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20060801092622.GA28388@verge.net.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20060801092622.GA28388@verge.net.au> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Horms Cc: Muli Ben-Yehuda , xen-devel , Akio Takebe , Kouya Shimura List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hi, Horms > Everyone, how about the below? >> 1. If crash_kexec() is called on dom0, dom0 do hypercall >> then xen do kexec/kdump >> 2. If crash_kexec() is called on domU, domU do hypercall >> then xen do panic_domain(), and domU's core is dumped. > >I think that is a good idea, because it gives consistent behaviour >for dom0 and domU, even though the mechanics differ. Though if >kexec for domU is merged, things may change at that time. > >> So I don't need to modify linux code. :-) > >:-) > >> Or How about "xm dump"? >> (Probably I use panic_domain() by hypercall. >> This way can probably dump HVM domain.) > >That is also a good idea, though it could be done as well, >rather than instead of your crash_kexec() -> hypercall idea. > >> I think we need to have the way manually to dump domU, or Xen. >> (Because for the time when domU or Xen don't panic >> and spinloop and so on) > >That is a good point, which makes your xm dump idea somewhat >more attactive than the crash_kexec() -> hypercall idea. >But I still think they both make sense. OK, I'll make "xm dump" soon. Please wait. Best Regards, Akio Takebe