Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 4 Apr 2022 16:43:34 -0400 | Subject | Re: [RFC 0/1] Add sysctl entry for controlling crash_kexec_post_notifiers | From | Alejandro Jimenez <> |
| |
Hi Guilherme,
On 4/2/2022 10:01 AM, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote: > On 01/04/2022 17:22, Alejandro Jimenez wrote: >> I noticed that in contrast to other kernel core parameters (e.g. kernel.panic, >> kernel.panic_on_warn, kernel.panic_print) crash_kexec_post_notifiers is not >> available as a sysctl tunable. I am aware that because it is a kernel core >> parameter, there is already an entry under: >> >> /sys/module/kernel/parameters/crash_kexec_post_notifiers >> >> and that allows us to read/modify it at runtime. However, I thought it should >> also be available via sysctl, since users that want to read/set this value at >> runtime might look there first. >> >> I believe there is an ongoing effort to clean up kernel/sysctl.c, but it wasn't >> clear to me if this entry (and perhaps the other panic related entries too) >> should be placed on kernel/panic.c. I wanted to verify first that this change >> would be welcomed before doing additional refactoring work. >> >> I'd appreciate any comments or suggestions. >> >> Thank you, >> Alejandro > Hi Alejandro, thanks for you patch. I have a "selfish" concern though, > I'll expose it here. > > I'm working a panic refactor, in order to split the panic notifiers in > more lists - good summary of this discussion at [0]. > I'm in the half of the patches, hopefully next 2 weeks I have something > ready to submit (I'll be out next week). > > As part of this effort, I plan to have a more fine-grained control of > this parameter, and it's going to be a sysctl, but not > "crash_kexec_post_notifiers" - this one should be kept I guess due to > retro-compatibility, but it'd be a layer on top oh the new one. It would be great to provide finer control and isolate the riskier modifiers.
I am using crash_kexec_post_notifiers to control behavior of pvpanic and pstore and there is not an urgent need for my change, so I don't mind waiting for the new interface to evolve. Please copy me if possible on future submissions.
Thank you, Alejandro
> With that said, unless you have urgent needs for this patch to be > reviewed/merged , I'd like to ask you to wait the series and I can loop > you there, so you may review/comment and see if it fits your use case. > > Thanks, > > > Guilherme > > > [0] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/YfPxvzSzDLjO5ldp@alley/
| |