Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 14:32:39 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
       Takao Indoh <indou.takao@soft.fujitsu.com>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de>
Cc: Dave Anderson <anderson@redhat.com>, Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [3/4] [PATCH]Diskdump - yet another crash dump function
Message-ID: <20040617123239.GA24647@elte.hu>
References: <20040527210447.GA2029@elte.hu> <C7C4545F11DFBEindou.takao@soft.fujitsu.com> <20040617121356.GA24338@elte.hu> <20040617121847.GA30894@infradead.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20040617121847.GA30894@infradead.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1133
Lines: 25


* Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote:

> Btw, now that we got you in the loop, any chance to see a forward-port
> of netdump to 2.6?  I think diskdump and netdump could share a lot of
> infrastructure, and given we already have the net polling hooks adding
> netdump shouldn't be that much work anymore.

i think a forward port of netdump might already exist - Jeff, Dave?

i agree that netdump and diskdump should be merged. (Red Hat is involved
in the diskdump project too so this is an ultimate goal even though the
patches are divergent.) Basically diskdumping is another IO transport -
the format, userspace tools and much of the non-IO kernel mechanism is
shared. Diskdumping is more complex on the driver level and it also
needs to be more careful because it writes to media so it verifies
various assumptions by reading on-disk sectors before writing to the
area.

	Ingo
-
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/