lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [RFC][PATCH 2/2] write callback: Check if existing entry is erasable
Date
> 10K is almost certainly more than we need for 99.9% of problems ... I set the default there to test out that pstore would correctly
> break a dump into more than one back-end ERST record (about 7K) and never changed it back. So don't treat 10K with any magic
> reverence. It's easy to argue that a smaller number is good enough.

OK.

> There are certainly less over-write worries if you can handle a few (4, 5, 6) simultaneously logged errors of sufficient size to be useful
> (must capture all of the panic strings, backtrace and register dump plus "enough" lines before the panic to see any obvious issues).
>

To handle multiple logs, I will probably introduce a new kernel parameter, like efi_pstore_max_log_num.
Users can calculate overall consumption of NVRAM for kmsg logging with it.

> If you only get to store two errors, then perhaps one non-over writable panic type entry, and one other "most recent" type entry?
>
> With just one, like current EFI, then there are certainly hard choices that might not be the best for certain pathological situations.

I will consider a policy for multiple logging from now.
(In case where oops happens multiple times and kernel hangs, oldest oops may be informative.... I can't decide the policy at this time.)

Seiji




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-07-06 02:41    [W:0.044 / U:8.108 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site