Akiyama, Nobuyuki wrote: > >I don't think all people will use kdump(but I recommend my customer >to use kdump ;-). >The aim of panic notifier and crash notifier is a little different, >so I thought these notifier lists should be separated. >The panic notifier was not expected of kdump after notifier return! >I think the better way is to modify panic notifiers to fit with >kdump and to move into crash notifier gradually if necessary. > > > Since I'm one of the people who very much would like best of both worlds, I do belive Vivek Goyal's concern about the reliability of kdump must be adressed properly.
I do belive the crash notifier should at least be a list of its own. Attaching element to the list proves your are kdump aware - in theory However: Conceptually I do not like the princip of implementing crash notifier as a list simply because for all (our) practical usage there will only be one element attached to the list anyway. And as I belive crash notifiers only will be used by a very limited number of users, I suggested in another mail that a simple if (function pointer) call functon approach to be used for this special case to keep things very simple. ./Preben _______________________________________________ fastboot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
