From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matt Mackall Subject: Re: Using netconsole for debugging suspend/resume Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 12:14:07 -0500 Message-ID: <20060609171407.GJ24227@waste.org> References: <20060608210702.GD24227@waste.org> <4489038C.3050901@intel.com> <20060608.222352.59657133.davem@davemloft.net> <200606090750.25067.ak@suse.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com, jeremy@goop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from waste.org ([64.81.244.121]:24207 "EHLO waste.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030272AbWFIRZI (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jun 2006 13:25:08 -0400 To: Andi Kleen Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200606090750.25067.ak@suse.de> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 07:50:25AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Friday 09 June 2006 07:23, David Miller wrote: > > From: Auke Kok > > Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 22:13:48 -0700 > > > > > netconsole should retry. There is no timeout programmed here since that might > > > lose important information, and you rather want netconsole to survive an odd > > > unplugged cable then to lose vital debugging information when the system is > > > busy for instance. (losing link will cause the interface to be down and thus > > > the queue to be stopped) > > > > I completely disagree that netpoll should loop when the ethernet > > cable is plugged out. > > Currently it is a bit dumb and doesn't distingush the various cases > well. > > I submitted a patch to loop to be a bit more clever at some point. It can be still > found in the netdev archives. Agreed that timeouts should happen. IIRC, the trouble with your patch was that it a) timed out on far too short a timescale and b) locked up on my box. Unfortunately, so did my own patch, which made timeouts approximately 1ms. -- Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.