Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 20 Apr 2007 11:15:26 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH -mm take4 2/6] support multiple logging |
| |
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 18:51:13 +0900 Keiichi KII <k-keiichi@bx.jp.nec.com> wrote:
> > I started to do some cleanups and fixups here, but abandoned it when it was > > all getting a bit large. > > > > Here are some fixes against this patch: > > I'm going to fix my patches by following your reviews and send new patches > on the LKML and the netdev ML in a few days. >
Well.. before you can finish this work we need to decide upon what the interface to userspace will be.
- The miscdev isn't appropriate
- netlink remains a possibility
- Stephen suggests an ioctl against a socket and davem suggests socket options, but it's unclear to me how that socket will get bound to netconsole?
either way, I agree with the overall thrust of this work: netconsole is useful in production environments, can become more useful and will need runtime configurability.
I wonder if we're approaching this in the right way, however...
At a high level, netconsole is just a flow of UDP packets between two machines. The kernel already has rich and well-understood ways of creating and configuring such flows.
So... instead of creating a brand new way of configuring such a flow via sysfs and ioctl, could we instead create a flow using the existing mechanisms (presumably the socket API) and then "transfer" the information from that flow over to netconsole by some means?? - 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/
| |