On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 11:36:13 +0200 Preben Traerup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Eric W. Biederman wrote: > > >Preben Traerup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > > > > >>Since I'm apperantly not the only one left with this choice I rather prefer > >>a > >>solution > >>made in public, that is known to be "bad" in some (well known) situations > >>than > >>each and everybody implements their own solution to the same problem. > >> > >> > > > >It is certainly worth discussing. > > > >Eric > > > > > > > To handle the contradiction of adding crash notifier to kexec and > maintaining kexec reliability > I suggest adding a flag to Kconfig > ENABLE_CRASH_NOTIFIER > > This removes any code in the critical path for people not needing crash > notification. I am just thinking same thing, but one point is different. To select policy by Kconfig is not flexible. If we want to change policy, we have to rebuild the kernel. I don't think that distributors release the kernels for each policy. Instead of Kconfig, how about using proc filesystem. e.g. kdump_safe. If kdump_safe is 1, crash notifier will not be called. If kdump_safe is 0, crash notifier will be called. Regards, Akiyama, Nobuyuki _______________________________________________ fastboot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/fastboot
