[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: what's next for the linux kernel?

    On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Chase Venters wrote:

    > As for error messages... the equivalent of the Linux kernel panic is basically
    > the Windows BSOD. Neither one of them should appear in the day to day use of
    > the system as they indicate bugs. Linux is actually the clear winner here, I
    > think, because a Windows BSOD gives you a single hex code and no indication
    > of what happened, except for very vague codes like
    > "PAGE_FAULT_IN_NON_PAGED_AREA". I'd much rather have a backtrace :) In any
    > case, I'm watching the work on kdump with a keen interest.

    And what about kexec? To be able to boot into another kernel on a kernel
    bug and still have access to all the memory and the system state of the
    bug. That's pretty cool. It would be like Windows going straight to
    Safe-Mode on a BSOFD without a reboot.

    > In any case, I think pretty much all of this work lives outside the kernel.
    > There is one side note I'd make about booting - my own boot process has to
    > wait forever for my Adaptec SCSI controller to wake up. It would be
    > interesting if bootup initialization tasks could be organized into dependency
    > levels and run in parallel, though as I'm a beginner to the workings of the
    > kernel I'm not entirely sure how possible this would be.

    I've been thinking of at least trying to see what would happen if I
    threaded the do_initcalls in main.c but lately I haven't had the time.

    -- Steve

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-10-05 08:58    [W:0.020 / U:6.304 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site