Perfect Petr, thanks for your feedback!
I'll be out for some weeks, but after that what I'm doing is to split
the series in 2 parts:
(a) The general fixes, which should be reviewed by subsystem maintainers
and even merged individually by them.
(b) The proper panic refactor, which includes the
Hey folks, first of all thanks a lot for the reviews / opinions about
this. I imagined that such change would be polemic, and I see I was
right heh
I'll try to "mix" all the relevant opinions in a single email, since
they happened in different responses and even different mail threads.
I've
"Guilherme G. Piccoli" writes:
> The panic() function is somewhat convoluted - a lot of changes were
> made over the years, adding comments that might be misleading/outdated
> now, it has a code structure that is a bit complex to follow, with
> lots of conditionals, for example. The panic
On 05/24/22 at 10:01am, Petr Mladek wrote:
> On Fri 2022-05-20 08:23:33, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> > On 19/05/2022 20:45, Baoquan He wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >> I really appreciate the summary skill you have, to convert complex
> > >> problems in very clear and concise ideas. Thanks for that,
On 05/20/22 at 08:23am, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> On 19/05/2022 20:45, Baoquan He wrote:
> > [...]
> >> I really appreciate the summary skill you have, to convert complex
> >> problems in very clear and concise ideas. Thanks for that, very useful!
> >> I agree with what was summarized above.
>
On 05/15/22 at 07:47pm, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> On 12/05/2022 11:03, Petr Mladek wrote:
..
> > OK, the question is how to make it better. Let's start with
> > a clear picture of the problem:
> >
> > 1. panic() has basically two funtions:
> >
> > + show/store debug information
On 19/05/2022 20:45, Baoquan He wrote:
> [...]
>> I really appreciate the summary skill you have, to convert complex
>> problems in very clear and concise ideas. Thanks for that, very useful!
>> I agree with what was summarized above.
>
> I want to say the similar words to Petr's reviewing
On 16/05/2022 07:21, Petr Mladek wrote:
> [...]
> Ah, it should have been:
>
> + notifiers vs. kmsg_dump
> + notifiers vs. crash_dump
> + crash_dump vs. kmsg_dump
>
> I am sorry for the confusion. Even "crash_dump" is slightly
> misleading because there is no function with this
On 12/05/2022 11:03, Petr Mladek wrote:
> Hello,
>
> first, I am sorry for stepping into the discussion so late.
> I was busy with some other stuff and this patchset is far
> from trivial.
>
> Second, thanks a lot for putting so much effort into it.
> Most of the changes look pretty good,
Hey Hatayma, thanks for your great analysis and no need for apologies!
I'll comment/respond properly inline below, just noticing here that I've
CCed Mark and Marc (from the ARM64 perspective), Michael (Hyper-V
perspective) and Hari (PowerPC perspective), besides the usual suspects
as Petr,
Sorry for the delayed response. Unfortunately, I had 10 days holidays
until yesterday...
> .../admin-guide/kernel-parameters.txt | 42 ++-
> include/linux/panic_notifier.h| 1 +
> kernel/kexec_core.c | 8 +-
> kernel/panic.c
On 29/04/2022 13:04, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> On 27/04/2022 21:28, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 4/27/22 15:49, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
>>> + crash_kexec_post_notifiers
>>> + This was DEPRECATED - users should always prefer the
>>
>> This is
On 03/05/2022 14:31, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote:
> [...]
>
> To me, it's a weak correlation between having a kmsg dumper, and
> wanting or not wanting the info level output to come before kdump.
> Hyper-V is one of only a few places that register a kmsg dumper, so most
> Linux instances outside
On 27/04/2022 21:28, Randy Dunlap wrote:
>
>
> On 4/27/22 15:49, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
>> +crash_kexec_post_notifiers
>> +This was DEPRECATED - users should always prefer the
>
> This is DEPRECATED - users should always prefer the
>
>> +
On 29/04/2022 14:53, Michael Kelley (LINUX) wrote:
> From: Guilherme G. Piccoli Sent: Wednesday, April 27,
> 2022 3:49 PM
>> [...]
>> +panic_notifiers_level=
>> +[KNL] Set the panic notifiers execution order.
>> +Format:
>> +We
On 4/27/22 15:49, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote:
> + crash_kexec_post_notifiers
> + This was DEPRECATED - users should always prefer the
This is DEPRECATED - users should always prefer the
> + parameter "panic_notifiers_level" -
The panic() function is somewhat convoluted - a lot of changes were
made over the years, adding comments that might be misleading/outdated
now, it has a code structure that is a bit complex to follow, with
lots of conditionals, for example. The panic notifier list is something
else - a single
17 matches
Mail list logo
