[lkml]   [2002]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [lkcd-devel] Re: What's left over.
"Randy.Dunlap" <> writes:

> {warning: cc: list too large :}
> On 9 Nov 2002, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> | There are two cases I am seeing users wanting.
> | 1) Load a new kernel on panic.
> | - Extra care must be taken so what broke the first kernel does
> | not break this one, and so that the shards of the old kernel
> | do not break it.
> | - Care must be taken so that loading the second kernel does not
> | erase valuable data that is desirable to place in a crash dump.
> | - This kernel cannot live at the same address as the old one, (at
> | least not initially).
> Conceptually we would like a new kernel on panic, although
> I doubt that it's normally safe to "load a new kernel on panic."
> Or maybe it depends on the definition of "load."
> What I'm trying to say is that I think the new kernel must
> already be loaded when the panic happens.
> Is that what you describe later (below)?

Yes that was my meaning. The new kernel must be preloaded.
And only started on panic.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:30    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean