Ok... that *sort of* makes sense, but also underscores how utterly different this is from a normal kexec.
Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: >On 22/11/2012 17:47, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> The other thing that should be considered here is how utterly >> preposterous the notion of doing in-guest crash dumping is in a >system >> that contains a hypervisor. The reason for kdump is that on bare >metal >> there are no other options, but in a hypervisor system the right >thing >> should be for the hypervisor to do the dump (possibly spawning a >clean >> I/O domain if the I/O domain is necessary to access the media.) >> >> There is absolutely no reason to have a crashkernel sitting around in > >> each guest, consuming memory, and possibly get corrupt. >> >> -hpa >> > >(Your reply to my email which I can see on the xen devel archive >appears >to have gotten lost somewhere inside the citrix email system, so >apologies for replying out of order) > >The kdump kernel loaded by dom0 is for when Xen crashes, not for when >dom0 crashes (although a dom0 crash does admittedly lead to a Xen >crash) > >There is no possible way it could be a separate domain; Xen completely >ceases to function as soon as jumps to the entry point of the kdump >image. > >~Andrew -- Sent from my mobile phone. Please excuse brevity and lack of formatting. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
