From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 11 Oct 2001 18:51:03 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 11 Oct 2001 18:50:53 -0400 Received: from mueller.uncooperative.org ([216.254.102.19]:54030 "EHLO mueller.datastacks.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 11 Oct 2001 18:50:33 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 18:51:04 -0400 From: Crutcher Dunnavant To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Sticky/Key-Setable SysRq (resubmit) Message-ID: <20011011185104.B32585@mueller.datastacks.com> Mail-Followup-To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20011009105251.A20842@mueller.datastacks.com> <9pvd04$9sd$1@cesium.transmeta.com> <3BC40C41.5040603@wipro.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3BC40C41.5040603@wipro.com>; from balbir.singh@wipro.com on Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 02:22:17PM +0530 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ++ 10/10/01 14:22 +0530 - BALBIR SINGH: > H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > >Followup to: <20011009105251.A20842@mueller.datastacks.com> > >By author: Crutcher Dunnavant > >In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > > >>Attached is the patch from last week which provides the sysrq system > >>with the following: > >> > >>a toggleable 'sticky' flag in /proc, which makes the sysrq key work > on bad > >>keyboards, and through bad KVMs. > >> > >>the ability to set which key in /proc, which makes the sysrq key work on > >>system _without_ a 'sysrq' key; like bad KVMs. > >> > >>I've gotten no tracktion on this in a week, so I'm resubmitting it. > >> > > > >I think doing this through procfs might be reasonable, but a kernel > >command line option would be absolutely mandatory. If things are > >crappy you might not get to the point of fidding with /proc. > > > >Also, I really think SysRq has nothing to do under "Kernel > >Hacking/Kernel Debugging". More than anything else it's a system > >administration feature. > > > > -hpa > > > > Also, when configuring the kernel you can decide not to have /proc > mounted (although this is very rare), but it might happen, if somebody > decided not to use it, so as suggested, I think a kernel command line > option would be nice. > > Balbir This gets into a realm of advanced/robust features which I want to add when 2.5 opens up. I will remember it, but right now I not seeing any traction on this at all. -- Crutcher GCS d--- s+:>+:- a-- C++++$ UL++++$ L+++$>++++ !E PS+++ PE Y+ PGP+>++++ R-(+++) !tv(+++) b+(++++) G+ e>++++ h+>++ r* y+>*$