[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    [W:0.045 / U:43.812 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site