Hello, On Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:36:49 -0500 Vivek Goyal <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 03:22:50PM +0530, Aravinda Prasad wrote: > > > > > > On 2012-11-15 21:25, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 09:27:45AM -0500, Dave Anderson wrote: > > > > > > [..] > > >>> Yes, makedumpfile needs to be linked against eppic library for filtering > > >>> data and this will increase makedumpfile size and initramfs size too. > > >> > > >> Just to clarify -- your example indicates that the vmlinux file is > > >> required > > >> for this facility to work, correct? > > >> > > >>> makedumpfile -c -d 31 -x vmlinux --eppic key.c vmcore filtered_vmcore > > >> > > >> Clearly distros won't be putting the vmlinux file in the initramfs -- > > >> that's > > >> the whole reasoning behind vmcoreinfo. So the 99% of users that aren't > > >> interested in scrubbing will have to pay the penalty of the larger > > >> makedumpfile > > >> binary. > > > > > > That's a good point Dave. We will never put debug compiled vmlinux in > > > initramfs. Following two alternatives come to my mind. > > > > > > As I mentioned, we don't need vmlinux in initramfs as filtering is done > > during post processing only. > > You are missing the point. The point is that despite the fact that > scrubbing will never be done from initramfs, all the users will pay > penalty for increased makedumpfile size. > > So why not write a separate tool (scrub-vmcore) so that makedumpfile > users don't pay the bloated size penatly. As Vivek said, I think it's difficult to persuade almost all distributor to specify EPPIC=on. So, it seems that separate tool is better way for both user and distributor. If you will make it, I will drop eppic support from v1.5.1 and export core functions from makedumpfile as library for such tools in the future. Does this meet your purpose, Aravinda ? Thanks Atsushi Kumagai _______________________________________________ kexec mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
