Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S267517AbTG3LL1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2003 07:11:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S270218AbTG3LL1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2003 07:11:27 -0400 Received: from web20401.mail.yahoo.com ([66.163.169.89]:37721 "HELO web20413.mail.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S267517AbTG3LL0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jul 2003 07:11:26 -0400 Message-ID: <20030730111125.3876.qmail@web20413.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 04:11:25 -0700 (PDT) From: devnetfs Subject: question on panic()? To: lkml MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1151 Lines: 31 Hello, I am writing a module and want to truly panic the machine in case of critical errors. I used the panic() function. But after panic() is called and panic() does its job, I am still able to ping to this box from outside. Looking at the panic() function, it looks all cpus _except_ the one on which panic() got called are halted ("hlt"). and interrupts are reenabled on _this_ CPU, hence NIC interrupts are allowed and pkts sent out in response to ping. Why is this done? should'nt panic() halt all the CPUs? And is there any way to halt all cpus? (can't do that after called panic() as its NORET!). I am working on RH 2.4.X kernel. (AFAIK this has not changed in 2.5 too). Thanks in Advance, A. PS: please Cc: me the reply. I am not subscribed to lkml. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com - 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/