[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:0.135 / U:9.908 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site