Mike Snitzer snit...@gmail.com writes:
On Sat, Jan 10, 2009 at 8:28 PM, Ingo Molnar mi...@elte.hu wrote:
Note, back when kdump was added to the kernel many moons ago i strongly
supported it and helped out with the patches, etc. I still think it might
have the potential to become big - but it
On Jan 10, 2009 16:15 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
In my experience, there are very few kernel versions and hardware for
which kdump works. I've talked to the people who have to make kdump
work, and every 12-18 months, with a new set of enterprise kernels
comes out, they have to go and fix
On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 5:11 AM, Andreas Dilger adil...@sun.com wrote:
On Jan 10, 2009 16:15 -0500, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
In my experience, there are very few kernel versions and hardware for
which kdump works. I've talked to the people who have to make kdump
work, and every 12-18 months,
On Sat, 10 Jan 2009, Andi Kleen wrote:
I think that's mostly because kexec from arbitary context is a
somewhat unstable concept.
I think that's the understatement of the year.
We have tons of problems with standard suspend-to-ram, and that's when the
suspend sequence has done its best to
* Linus Torvalds torva...@linux-foundation.org wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, digital cameras have been more useful than
kernel dumps to kernel debugging.
Yes, especially ones with VGA video capture. (I caught a
oops+triple-fault crash via that trick once, which was not
serial-console
