Eric Seppanen wrote:
> I still fail to see why you couldn't require the console to force "safe"
> settings if you get too agressive. Are you really testing new settings on
> your whole cluster simultaneously?
We're designing headless nodes now that only have network interfaces, with no way to
hook up a
monitor or a keyboard. The only way to change BIOS settings is over the network or
replace the flash
device.
> Basically, it seems to me you're modifying the basic architecture of
> linuxbios for cluster applications. This change is rather unfriendly
> towards embedded systems or thin-client type systems. Isn't that a *bad*
> thing?
Shouldn't we have both options of complete control over the network and also safe
recovery from
aggressive settings for systems without a network?
>
> Another idea: linuxbios, as it starts, stores a magic value somewhere
> (say, in CMOS ram) that basically says "I'm booting with agressive
> settings". Then, when linux hits runlevel 3, you have a userspace app go
> and erase that magic value.
>
> Then, if a system ever fails to boot with agressive settings, you could
> simply power-cycle (or reset the box in any way) and when linuxbios boots
> it can see that the magic value is already present, and knows the previous
> boot must have failed... therefore it uses the safe settings.
Bari
