public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
To: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>
Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>,
	linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jarod Wilson <jwilson@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Query about kdump_msg hook into crash_kexec()
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 10:00:47 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110204150047.GC32190@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110203141850.93C2.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>

On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 02:20:53PM +0900, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > AFAIK, kexec is used sneak rebooting way when the system face unexpected
> > scenario on some devices. (Some embedded is running very long time, then 
> > it can't avoid memory bit corruption. all of reset is a last resort. 
> > and a vendor gather logs at periodically checkback).
> > 
> > The main purpose of to introduce KMSG_DUMP_KEXEC is to be separate it
> > from KMSG_DUMP_PANIC. At kmsg_dump() initial patch, KMSG_DUMP_PANIC 
> > is always called both kdump is configured or not. But it's no good idea
> > the same log is to be appeared when both kexec was successed and failured.
> > Moreover someone don't want any log at kexec phase. They only want logs
> > when real panic (ie kexec failure) route. Then, I've separated it to two.
> > Two separated argument can solve above both requreiment.
> 
> A bit additional explanation, An original patch have kmsg_dump(KMSG_DUMP_PANIC)
> callsite at following point. I didn't think it makes either embedded or 
> kdump folks happiness. Thus I moved it after crash_kexec().
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> @@ -74,6 +75,7 @@ NORET_TYPE void panic(const char * fmt, ...)
>         dump_stack();
>  #endif
> 
> +       kmsg_dump(KMSG_DUMP_PANIC);
>         /*
>          * If we have crashed and we have a crash kernel loaded let it handle
>          * everything else.
>          * Do we want to call this before we try to display a message?
>          */
>         crash_kexec(NULL);
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------

And I think to compensate for that somebody introduced additional
kmsg_dump(KEXEC) call inside crash_kexec() and put it under CONFIG
option so that one can change the behavior based on config options.

I think this makes the logic somewhat twisted and an unnecessary call
inside crash_kexec(). So until and unless there is a strong reason we
can get rid of KEXEC event and move kmsg_dump call before crash_kexec()
for now and see how does it go, IMHO.

Vivek

  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-04 15:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-01-31 22:59 Query about kdump_msg hook into crash_kexec() Vivek Goyal
2011-02-01  7:19 ` Américo Wang
2011-02-01  7:33   ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-01  7:38     ` Américo Wang
2011-02-01  8:13       ` [Patch] kexec: remove KMSG_DUMP_KEXEC (was Re: Query about kdump_msg hook into crash_kexec()) Américo Wang
2011-02-01 15:28         ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-01 16:06           ` Jarod Wilson
2011-02-03  0:59         ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-02-03  2:07           ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-03  4:53             ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-26 20:10               ` Andrew Morton
2011-05-28  1:43                 ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-05-30  7:30                   ` Américo Wang
2011-05-30  5:13                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-05-31 21:51                   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-06-09 11:00                     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-06-14 22:13                       ` Vivek Goyal
2011-05-31 20:58                 ` Seiji Aguchi
2011-05-31 21:37                   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-05-31 22:24                     ` Seiji Aguchi
2011-06-02  3:26                       ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-06-08  0:00                         ` Andrew Morton
2011-06-09 11:15                         ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-02-03  0:55 ` Query about kdump_msg hook into crash_kexec() KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-02-03  2:05   ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-03  4:52     ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-02-03  5:20       ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-02-04 15:00         ` Vivek Goyal [this message]
2011-03-08  1:31           ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-02-04 14:58       ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-03 18:38     ` Seiji Aguchi
2011-02-03 21:13       ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-03 22:08         ` Seiji Aguchi
2011-02-04  2:24           ` Américo Wang
2011-02-04  2:50             ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-04  3:28               ` Américo Wang
2011-02-04  6:40                 ` KOSAKI Motohiro
2011-02-08 16:46           ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-08 17:35             ` Eric W. Biederman
2011-02-08 19:27               ` Vivek Goyal
2011-02-08 19:58                 ` Eric W. Biederman

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=20110204150047.GC32190@redhat.com \
    --to=vgoyal@redhat.com \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=jwilson@redhat.com \
    --cc=kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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