Re: Is notify_die being overloaded?

Robin Holt
2006-04-17T11:29:49Z

On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 05:51:44AM -0500, Robin Holt wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2006 at 05:52:10PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
> > Robin Holt (on Sat, 15 Apr 2006 05:43:56 -0500) wrote:
...
> > Unfortunately the ebents are ambiguous. On IA64 BUG() maps to break 0,
> > but break 0 is also used for debugging[*]. Which makes it awkward to
> > differentiate between a kernel error and a debug event, we have to
> > first ask the debuggers if the event if for them then, if the debuggers
> > do not want the event, drop into the die_if_kernel event.
>
> I think this still would argue for a notify_debugger() sort of callout
> which would read something like:

I finally think I understand your point. You are saying that kdb would
have to register for the notify_debugger() chain and would therefore
get in the way of handle_page_fault(). What about changing notify_die()
callout in handle_page_fault() into a notify_page_fault(). That actually
feels a lot better now that you got me to think about it.

Thanks,
Robin