Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 22:23:33 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 22:23:23 -0500 Received: from smtp.alacritech.com ([209.10.208.82]:31749 "EHLO smtp.alacritech.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 10 Nov 2000 22:23:14 -0500 Message-ID: <3A0CBD16.5A07D189@alacritech.com> Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 19:29:26 -0800 From: "Matt D. Robinson" Organization: Alacritech, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.17 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" CC: Christoph Rohland , richardj_moore@uk.ibm.com, Paul Jakma , Michael Rothwell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Generalised Kernel Hooks Interface (GKHI) In-Reply-To: <200011110012.TAA22015@tsx-prime.MIT.EDU> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org "Theodore Y. Ts'o" wrote: > > Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2000 10:36:31 -0800 > From: "Matt D. Robinson" > > As soon as I finish writing raw write disk routines (not using kiobufs), > we can _maybe_ get LKCD accepted one of these days, especially now that we > don't have to build 'lcrash' against a kernel revision. I'm in the > middle of putting together raw IDE functions now -- see LKCD mailing > list for details if you're curious. > > Great! Are you thinking about putting the crash dumper and the raw > write disk routines in a separate text section, so they can be located > in pages which are write-protected from accidental modification in case > some kernel code goes wild? (Who me? Paranoid? :-) > > - Ted We're planning to isolate the write functions as much as possible. In the past, we've been bitten by this whole concept of Linux "raw I/O". When I was at SGI, we were able to write to a block device directly through low-level driver functions that weren't inhibited by any locking, and that was after shutting down all processors and any other outstanding interrupts. For Linux, I had given up and stuck with the raw I/O interpretation of kiobufs, which is just flat out wrong to do for dumping purposes. Secondly, as Linus said to me a few weeks ago, he doesn't trust the current disk drivers to be able to reliably dump when a crash occurs. Don't even ask me to go into all the reasons kiobufs are wrong for crash dumping. Just read the code -- it'll be obvious enough. So I guess after a few months/years, we're finally at a point where we're saying, "Okay, forget all this, let's do this the right way, so we don't have these problems anymore." We're removing lcrash from the kernel, putting it into its own RPM, and adding patches to the kernel for LKCD that build in crash dump functionality and make a new "Kernsyms" file so that we can dynamically read the symbol table of major parts of the kernel and give you memory dumps, stack traces, and even dump out entire structures dynamically. Then we'll have the right crash dump mechanism for everyone. It's time to get RAS moving for Linux. GKHI and LKCD are the first steps to get us there (IMHO). --Matt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/