Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 10 Nov 2000 10:36:31 -0800 | From | "Matt D. Robinson" <> | Subject | Re: [ANNOUNCE] Generalised Kernel Hooks Interface (GKHI) |
| |
Christoph Rohland wrote: > > Hi Theodore, > > On Fri, 10 Nov 2000, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > > P.S. There are some such RAS features which I wouldn't be surprised > > there being interest in having integrated into the kernel directly > > post-2.4, with no need to put in "kernel hooks" for that particular > > feature. A good example of that would be kernel crash dumps. For > > all Linux houses which are doing support of customers remotely, > > being able to get a crash dump so that developers can investigate a > > problem remotely instead of having to fly a developer out to the > > customer site is invaluable. In fact, it might be considerd more > > valuable than the kernel debugger.... > > *Yes* :-)
As soon as I finish writing raw write disk routines (not using kiobufs), we can _maybe_ get LKCD accepted one of these days, especially now that we don't have to build 'lcrash' against a kernel revision. I'm in the middle of putting together raw IDE functions now -- see LKCD mailing list for details if you're curious.
IMHO, GKHI is a good thing -- it would be great to see this used for ASSERT() cases (something you can turn on by 'insmod assert.o', which would then trigger assert conditionals throughout the kernel ...) I realize it would mean some bloat, and I doubt Linus would accept it, but it's a nifty concept for enterprise Linux servers (especially those that want quick answers to system crashes).
--Matt
> Greetings > Christoph - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |