Carol Hebert wrote:
> Regarding the question of why anyone would want to stop the daemon, I
> guess there could be reasons why someone would want to stop it
> (temporarily). Maybe they would want to change the
> timeout/pretimeout/action/etc. settings during ipmi_watchdog module
> insertion time (
Hi,
Thanks much to Arkadiusz Miśkiewicz for pointing out that the watchdog
daemon actually *does* write the "V". :-) I guess I was looking mostly
at using the wd_keepalive daemon and it turns out that that daemon is
the only one of the two that doesn't write the "V". I also noticed
that the de
On Friday 29 September 2006 03:45, Corey Minyard wrote:
> The "V" character is standard for all watchdog drivers in Linux, so it
> is a little surprising that the daemons don't support it. But not
> terribly surprising.
shutdown.c
/* close the device and check for error */
static void close_all()
--On Thursday, September 28, 2006 8:45 PM -0500 Corey Minyard
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I guess the big question in my mind is why you would ever want to stop
> the watchdog daemon for long enough to allow the watchdog to go off. It
> seems you are opening a window for an unprotected failure.
The "V" character is standard for all watchdog drivers in Linux, so it
is a little surprising that the daemons don't support it. But not
terribly surprising.
I guess the big question in my mind is why you would ever want to stop
the watchdog daemon for long enough to allow the watchdog to go off.
Hi Corey,
Thanks again to everyone who sent the excellent pointers to existing
watchdog daemons. Two of the daemons at the ibiblio.org site (URL
below) seemed to do everything I was hoping for (and more :-). The
watchdog and wd_keepalive daemons seem to work very well with the
ipmi_watchdog dri
Al Chu wrote:
>> Deployed successfully for a number of months until we realized it
>> couldn't quite do for us what we wanted (generate netdumps via SMI
>> interrupts).
>>
>
> Hmm. For the record, the issue was an interrupt issue in the kernel.
> Not anything having to do with the BMC's abili
Doug Ambrisko wrote:
> Dmitry Frolov writes:
> | * Carol Hebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [12.08.2006 07:25]:
> | > I'm looking into what it would take to write a watchdog daemon and am
> | > trying to put together a list of requirements. I guess the first thing
> | > I need to know is whether anyone el
Dmitry Frolov writes:
| * Carol Hebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [12.08.2006 07:25]:
| > I'm looking into what it would take to write a watchdog daemon and am
| > trying to put together a list of requirements. I guess the first thing
| > I need to know is whether anyone else is currently working on an i
* Al Chu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [12.08.2006 07:36]:
> Hi Carol,
>
> I developed a user space daemon for FreeIPMI sometime ago.
>
> http://www.gnu.org/software/freeipmi/
>
> Deployed successfully for a number of months until we realized it
> couldn't quite do for us what we wanted (generate netdump
* Carol Hebert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [12.08.2006 07:25]:
> Hi,
>
> I'm looking into what it would take to write a watchdog daemon and am
> trying to put together a list of requirements. I guess the first thing
> I need to know is whether anyone else is currently working on an ipmi
> watchdog daemo
> Deployed successfully for a number of months until we realized it
> couldn't quite do for us what we wanted (generate netdumps via SMI
> interrupts).
Hmm. For the record, the issue was an interrupt issue in the kernel.
Not anything having to do with the BMC's ability to generate the
interrupt.
Hi Carol,
I developed a user space daemon for FreeIPMI sometime ago.
http://www.gnu.org/software/freeipmi/
Deployed successfully for a number of months until we realized it
couldn't quite do for us what we wanted (generate netdumps via SMI
interrupts). I'm not sure if anyone else has used it re
13 matches
Mail list logo
