Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754888Ab2FMXUU (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:20:20 -0400 Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:28906 "EHLO mga09.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754470Ab2FMXUS convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jun 2012 19:20:18 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.67,352,1309762800"; d="scan'208";a="152841868" From: "Luck, Tony" To: Seiji Aguchi , Mike Waychison CC: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "Matthew Garrett (mjg@redhat.com)" , "gong.chen@linux.intel.com" , "keescook@chromium.org" , "rob@landley.net" , "dle-develop@lists.sourceforge.net" , Satoru Moriya Subject: RE: [RFC][Patch]efi_pstore:Introduce an efi_pstore_overwrite parameter to avoid missing messages in NVRAM Thread-Topic: [RFC][Patch]efi_pstore:Introduce an efi_pstore_overwrite parameter to avoid missing messages in NVRAM Thread-Index: Ac1Jaf3kQfy2nRzQSNG3UORn8S5p+AAc0YIAAA6J6JAAGwBGkAAyPwIg Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 23:20:15 +0000 Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F1930CA84@ORSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com> References: <5C4C569E8A4B9B42A84A977CF070A35B2E5A4DB2B8@USINDEVS01.corp.hds.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F1930C820@ORSMSX103.amr.corp.intel.com> <5C4C569E8A4B9B42A84A977CF070A35B2E5A4DB451@USINDEVS01.corp.hds.com> In-Reply-To: <5C4C569E8A4B9B42A84A977CF070A35B2E5A4DB451@USINDEVS01.corp.hds.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.22.254.138] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 852 Lines: 17 > Should it be in pstore layer? > - introducing a new global variable storing a previous trigger. > - deciding if we can continue by checking a value of previous trigger at the beginning of pstore_dump(). I think not - the limitation is EFI (ERST can handle several errors, I think that the ramoops patches are working with the assumption that enough storage is available too). The question is how easy is it for EFI to determine the "type" of the saved error (which may be from the previous booted kernel - so no use using a global variable ... the information needs to be in persistent store). -Tony -- 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/