public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Preben Traerup <Preben.Trarup@ericsson.com>
To: vgoyal@in.ibm.com
Cc: "Akiyama, Nobuyuki" <akiyama.nobuyuk@jp.fujitsu.com>,
	fastboot@lists.osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Fastboot] [RFC][PATCH] Add missing notifier before crashing
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2006 12:12:03 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <448554F3.1000308@ericsson.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060602145626.GB29610@in.ibm.com>

Vivek Goyal wrote:

>I think if we decide to implement something which allows other policies 
>to co-exist with crash_kexec() then it should be more generic then a
>single function pointer.
>
>Thanks
>Vivek
>
>  
>
A single function pointer function is suggested because it is the 
simpliest compromise
I can thing of which should be able to satisfy all.

The simpliest policy I can think of is
-flip a bit on _dedicated_ hardware (crash notifier)
-launch capture kernel (existing kexec)

Nothing prevents you from implementing multiple policies to be 
executed/selected among from
whatever is called by the single pointer function.


My key point is:
The complexity in my suggestion is a low as it can get, thus reliability of
kexec (hopefully) is unaffected
If crash notifiers is implemented by a complex "management system", I 
might loose
reliability of kexec because of something I basically do not need.

Or to put it in other words, I you need to implement anything complex 
for managing your policies,
you should add it yourself and you yourself is the only one being 
affected by increased complexibility.

./Preben

      reply	other threads:[~2006-06-06 10:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-05-30  9:33 [RFC][PATCH] Add missing notifier before crashing Akiyama, Nobuyuki
2006-05-30 14:56 ` [Fastboot] " Vivek Goyal
2006-05-31  9:20   ` Akiyama, Nobuyuki
2006-05-31 15:43     ` Vivek Goyal
2006-06-01 10:50       ` Preben Traerup
2006-06-01 12:37       ` Akiyama, Nobuyuki
2006-06-01 15:16         ` Vivek Goyal
2006-06-02  5:13           ` Akiyama, Nobuyuki
2006-06-02 10:08             ` Preben Traerup
2006-06-02 11:52               ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-06-02 13:20                 ` Preben Traerup
2006-06-02 15:20                   ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-06-02 15:37                     ` Vivek Goyal
2006-06-02 16:39                       ` Eric W. Biederman
2006-06-06  9:36                     ` Preben Traerup
2006-06-06 11:08                       ` Akiyama, Nobuyuki
2006-06-06 13:59                         ` Akiyama, Nobuyuki
2006-06-02 14:53                 ` Vivek Goyal
2006-06-05 11:46                 ` Akiyama, Nobuyuki
2006-06-02 14:56               ` Vivek Goyal
2006-06-06 10:12                 ` Preben Traerup [this message]

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=448554F3.1000308@ericsson.com \
    --to=preben.trarup@ericsson.com \
    --cc=akiyama.nobuyuk@jp.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=fastboot@lists.osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --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