Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:54:18 +0200 | From | Carsten Otte <> | Subject | Re: Linux Kernel Dump Summit 2005 |
| |
Andrew Morton wrote: > I was rather expecting that the various groups which are interested in > crash dumping would converge around kdump once it was merged. But it seems > that this is not the case and that work continues on other strategies. > > Is that a correct impression? If so, what shortcoming(s) in kdump are > causing people to be reluctant to use it? On 390, we have standalone dump. That is a tool you can install on a disk with zipl (like lilo) and that you boot when your server has crashed. Newer machines also have a hardware feature built-in that does this from the service element (that is a laptop computer mounted to the big box). When running on z/VM, there is a command you can enter on z/VM's console which causes z/VM to create a dump of Linux' memory. Different from kdump we can even take a dump if our system is so badly corrupted that you don't even get a panic message. As far as I know, kdump would require to reserve memory for the extra kernel prior to crash, which is not the case with our soloutions. --
Carsten Otte IBM Linux technology center ARCH=s390 - 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/
| |