From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
To: Takenori Nagano <t-nagano@ah.jp.nec.com>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
vgoyal@in.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
k-miyoshi@cb.jp.nec.com, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
Bernhard Walle <bwalle@suse.de>, Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>,
kdb@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] add new notifier function ,take2
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 22:00:03 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200710212200.04361.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47171ED9.7010907@ah.jp.nec.com>
On Thursday 18 October 2007 18:52, Takenori Nagano wrote:
> Vivek Goyal wrote:
> > > My stance is that _all_ the RAS tools (kdb, kgdb, nlkd, netdump, lkcd,
> > > crash, kdump etc.) should be using a common interface that safely puts
> > > the entire system in a stopped state and saves the state of each cpu.
> > > Then each tool can do what it likes, instead of every RAS tool doing
> > > its own thing and they all conflict with each other, which is why this
> > > thread started.
> > >
> > > It is not the kernel's job to decide which RAS tool runs first, second
> > > etc., it is the user's decision to set that policy. Different sites
> > > will want different orders, some will say "go straight to kdump", other
> > > sites will want to invoke a debugger first. Sites must be able to
> > > define that policy, but we hard code the policy into the kernel.
>
> I agreed with him and I made new notifier function that users can change
> the order. Priority value in notifier blocks are hardcoded. If users want
> to change list order, they have to rebuild kernel. I think it is very
> unhappy.
Is it possible to use a single bit of common code and a single
notifier for these things? Or is it too difficult?
One thing I'd suggest is not to use debugfs, if it is going to
be a useful end-user feature.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-22 0:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-18 6:45 [PATCH 0/2] add new notifier function ,take2 Takenori Nagano
2007-10-18 7:06 ` Andrew Morton
2007-10-18 8:06 ` Vivek Goyal
2007-10-18 8:52 ` Takenori Nagano
2007-10-21 12:00 ` Nick Piggin [this message]
[not found] ` <471D4668.4090300@ah.jp.nec.com>
2007-10-24 6:48 ` sysfs sys/kernel/ namespace (was Re: [PATCH 0/2] add new notifier function ,take2) Nick Piggin
2007-10-24 11:12 ` Kay Sievers
2007-10-25 2:31 ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-25 5:45 ` Greg KH
2007-10-25 6:12 ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-25 6:48 ` [PATCH 0/2] add new notifier function ,take2 Takenori Nagano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200710212200.04361.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--to=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bwalle@suse.de \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=k-miyoshi@cb.jp.nec.com \
--cc=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=kdb@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=t-nagano@ah.jp.nec.com \
--cc=vgoyal@in.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox