Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:45:02 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH, RFC] panic-note: Annotation from user space for panics | From | Marco Stornelli <> |
| |
2009/11/17 Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>: > Take a look at my mails where I describe different complications we have > in our system. We really want to have an OOPS/panic + our environment > stuff to go together, at once. This makes things so much simpler. > > Really, what is the problem providing this trivial panic-note > capability, where user-space can give the kernel a small buffer, and ask > the kernel to print this buffer at the oops/panic time. Very simple and > elegant, and just solves the problem. > > Why perversions with time-stamps, separate storages are needed? > > IOW, you suggest a complicated approach, and demand explaining why we do > not go for it. Simply because it is unnecessarily complex.
I don't think it's a complicated approach we are talking of a system log like syslog with a temporal information, nothing more.
> This patch solves the problem gracefully, and I'd rather demand you to point what > is the technical problem with the patches. >
Simply because I think that we should avoid to include in the kernel things we can do in a simply way at user space level. I think this patch is well done but it's one of the patches that are solutions "for embedded only", but it's only my opinion.
Marco
| |