![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 08:38:05PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote: >> In summary, right now co-existence of kdb with kdump seems to be your pain > point. I would prefer that kdb just puts a break point on panic() and we move > on. If there are more candidates down the line and these can't be easily > executed in second kernel then we can re-visit this notification list > mechanism. Hi Vivek, Thank you for your comment. :-) I don't mind kdb and kdump problem now. Because my patches are not merged into mainline kernel yet. If they are merged, I think how we can resolve about RAS tools problem. >> # ls>> ipmi_msghandler ipmi_wdog>> # cat ipmi_msghandler/priority>> 200>> # cat ipmi_wdog/priority>> 150>> #>> Kernel panic - not syncing: panic>> ipmi_msghandler : notifier calls panic_event().>> ipmi_watchdog : notifier calls wdog_panic_handler(). >>>> .....(reboot)>>> > We also need to implement a file which can give a consolidated view. All > the registered members and their priority. I tried to implement it, but its impact is large. And we can get all priority values using "ls" and "cat */priority". I'll implement it if user strongly expects it. ex) # cd panic_notifier_list # ls ipmi_msghandler ipmi_wdog # cat */priority 200 150 # Thanks, Takenori Nagano <t-nagano@ah.jp.nec.com> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-10-05 07:49 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||