Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759999AbXHWD4U (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Aug 2007 23:56:20 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756100AbXHWD4N (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Aug 2007 23:56:13 -0400 Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.151]:54287 "EHLO e33.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755194AbXHWD4M (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Aug 2007 23:56:12 -0400 Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 09:26:29 +0530 From: Vivek Goyal To: Jay Lan Cc: Takenori Nagano , k-miyoshi@cb.jp.nec.com, Bernhard Walle , kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Eric W. Biederman" , Keith Owens , Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [patch] add kdump_after_notifier Message-ID: <20070823035629.GB365@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: vgoyal@in.ibm.com References: <20070802112852.GA7054@in.ibm.com> <31687.1186113947@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com> <20070805110746.GA12540@in.ibm.com> <46C1691E.7090708@ah.jp.nec.com> <20070814083710.GA14538@suse.de> <20070814132454.GA8293@in.ibm.com> <46C4184B.5030303@ah.jp.nec.com> <20070817105630.GA18167@in.ibm.com> <46CAE627.7070908@sgi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <46CAE627.7070908@sgi.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1844 Lines: 53 On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 06:18:31AM -0700, Jay Lan wrote: [..] > >>> Now user will be able to view all the die_chain users through sysfs and > >>> be able to modify the order in which these should run by modifying their > >>> priority. Hence all the RAS tools can co-exist. > >> This is my image of your proposal. > >> > >> - Print current order > >> > >> # cat /sys/class/misc/debug/panic_notifier_list > >> priority name > >> 1 IPMI > >> 2 watchdog > >> 3 Kdb > >> 4 Kdump > >> > > > > I think Bernhard's suggestion looks better here. I noticed that > > /sys/kernel/debug is already present. So how about following. > > > > /sys/kernel/debug/kdump/priority > > /sys/kernel/debug/kdb/priority > > /sys/kernel/debug/IPMI/priority > > Why separate priority files is better than a central file? > At least i think you get a grand picture of priority being > defined for all parties with a central file? > I thought of couple of reasons. - A very different syntax to modify the priority. - Separate directories allow easy future extensions in terms of more files. For example, putting a small "description" file in each dir where each registered user can specify what does it do. But I agree that a single file is good for consolidated view. As bernhard suggested, may be we should also implement a read only file where one will get a consolidated view. > What do we decide priority if more than one component has > the same priority value? > I think first come first serve would be appropriate in this case instead of returning -EINVAL. Thanks Vivek - 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/