Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755508AbZJ2Snu (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:43:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755409AbZJ2Snu (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:43:50 -0400 Received: from out02.mta.xmission.com ([166.70.13.232]:35782 "EHLO out02.mta.xmission.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755358AbZJ2Snt (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Oct 2009 14:43:49 -0400 To: Jin Dongming Cc: Vivek Goyal , LKLM , Kenji Kaneshige , Hidetoshi Seto , Lon Hohberger , Neil Horman Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC][Patch x86-tip] add notifier before kdump References: <4AE6B1CC.6040603@np.css.fujitsu.com> <20091027150725.GD10513@redhat.com> <4AE949A5.9080509@np.css.fujitsu.com> From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2009 11:43:49 -0700 In-Reply-To: <4AE949A5.9080509@np.css.fujitsu.com> (Jin Dongming's message of "Thu\, 29 Oct 2009 16\:52\:05 +0900") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-XM-SPF: eid=;;;mid=;;;hst=in01.mta.xmission.com;;;ip=76.21.114.89;;;frm=ebiederm@xmission.com;;;spf=neutral X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 76.21.114.89 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ebiederm@xmission.com X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Thu, 25 Oct 2007 00:26:12 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on in01.mta.xmission.com); Unknown failure Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1532 Lines: 38 Jin Dongming writes: > Hi Vivek > > Vivek Goyal wrote: >> - Other thing, I think Eric Biederman suggested was that we need to see >> the code that will be executed after crash so that it can be audited and >> keep it in kernel instead of blindly exporting a hook to module and let >> module do whatever it want to do. >> > > I am sorry for that I could not catch the meaning of above words. In my > understanding: > If the code is already in current kernel and no matter whether it is built > or modulized, the code could be added before crash_kexec. Is it right? No. crash_kexec skips the calling the notifiers intentionally to increase it's robustness. > If my understanding is not right, please let me ask a question before we > provide the code. > What kind of code is considered as nice code and could be added into > current kernel? Could you give me some requirements or examples > about nice code? In general code that is necessary. If we can find a way to avoid running code in a broken kernel we should. The recent addition of code to disable processor vitalization features on a crash is an example of code that is necessary. A small function that we can always call that is not provided by a module. Eric -- 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/