From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752249Ab0IEGet (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Sep 2010 02:34:49 -0400 Received: from cantor.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:56678 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752003Ab0IEGes (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Sep 2010 02:34:48 -0400 Date: Sat, 4 Sep 2010 23:22:55 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Guenter Roeck Cc: CAI Qian , Dave Anderson , "tj@kernel.org" , linux-kernel Subject: Re: crash failure with 2.6.36-rc3 vmcore Message-ID: <20100905062255.GA18184@suse.de> References: <20100904175501.GB31733@ericsson.com> <2068181682.121641283656654395.JavaMail.root@zmail06.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> <20100905050625.GA700@ericsson.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100905050625.GA700@ericsson.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Sep 04, 2010 at 10:06:25PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > I browsed through the code a bit. Looks like the module owner will need to make > the necessary changes. The code now seems to depend on kernel internal structure > elements. Not sure if that is a good idea in the first place. At least for > the attribute owner it will have to be changed to not depend on its existence. > > Of course, one could also argue that the field should be re-introduced in > the kernel to make the utility work w/o changes. However, I don't think it > would be a good idea to hold the kernel hostage for such problems. You're kidding, right? You should have tools flexable to handle the fact that the internal kernel structures change all the time like this. If not, your tools are broken. good luck, greg k-h