Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:53:00 +0900 Takenori Nagano wrote:
>
>> This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
>> atomic_notifier_chain.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Takenori Na
Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:53:03 +0900 Takenori Nagano wrote:
>
>> This patch implements new notifier function to panic_notifier_list. We can
>> change the list of order by debugfs.
>
> Should be sysfs IMO. debugfs isn't (should not be) requi
Nick Piggin wrote:
>>> Is it possible to use a single bit of common code and a single
>>> notifier for these things? Or is it too difficult?
>> >
>> > I'm sorry, I can't understand your image well. I'd like to know details of
>> > your image.
>
> Rather than have each of "RAS tools" have their
Nick Piggin wrote:
Is it possible to use a single bit of common code and a single
notifier for these things? Or is it too difficult?
I'm sorry, I can't understand your image well. I'd like to know details of
your image.
Rather than have each of RAS tools have their own notifier, and
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:53:03 +0900 Takenori Nagano wrote:
This patch implements new notifier function to panic_notifier_list. We can
change the list of order by debugfs.
Should be sysfs IMO. debugfs isn't (should not be) required.
OK. We try to find an appropriate
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:53:00 +0900 Takenori Nagano wrote:
This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
atomic_notifier_chain.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23.orig/kernel/sys.c
This patch implements new notifier function to panic_notifier_list. We can
change the list of order by debugfs.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23.orig/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
linux-2.6.23/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
--- linux-
This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
atomic_notifier_chain.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23.orig/include/linux/notifier.h
linux-2.6.23/include/linux/notifier.h
--- linux-2.6.23.orig/include
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 12:06:51AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:45:08 +0900 Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I can sort-of see what this is doing. Runtime-definable management of
>> which notifier function
ipmi_msghandler : notifier calls panic_event().
--
Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This patch implements new notifier function to panic_notifier_list. We can
change the list of order by debugfs.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23.orig/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
linux-2.6.23/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
--- linux-2.6.2
This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
atomic_notifier_chain.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23.orig/include/linux/notifier.h
linux-2.6.23/include/linux/notifier.h
--- linux-2.6.23.orig/include
This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
atomic_notifier_chain.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23.orig/include/linux/notifier.h
linux-2.6.23/include/linux/notifier.h
--- linux-2.6.23.orig/include/linux
panic_event().
--
Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This patch implements new notifier function to panic_notifier_list. We can
change the list of order by debugfs.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23.orig/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
linux-2.6.23/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
--- linux-2.6.23.orig
This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
atomic_notifier_chain.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23.orig/include/linux/notifier.h
linux-2.6.23/include/linux/notifier.h
--- linux-2.6.23.orig/include/linux
Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 12:06:51AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:45:08 +0900 Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can sort-of see what this is doing. Runtime-definable management of
which notifier functions will be called on a panic? Or maybe I
This patch implements new notifier function to panic_notifier_list. We can
change the list of order by debugfs.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23.orig/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
linux-2.6.23/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
--- linux-2.6.23.orig
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> These patches add new notifier function and implement it to
>> panic_notifier_list.
>> We used the hardcoded notifier chain so far, but it was not flexible. New
>
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi,
These patches add new notifier function and implement it to
panic_notifier_list.
We used the hardcoded notifier chain so far, but it was not flexible. New
notifier is very flexible, because user can change a list
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 08:38:50PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
>
>> @@ -522,8 +530,8 @@ setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
>> }
>>
>> /* Register a call for panic conditions. */
>> -atomic_notifier_chain_register(_notifier_list,
Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 08:38:50PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
@@ -522,8 +530,8 @@ setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
}
/* Register a call for panic conditions. */
-atomic_notifier_chain_register(panic_notifier_list,
-alpha_panic_block
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 08:38:34PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
>> This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
>> atomic_notifier_chain.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Takenori
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 08:38:05PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
>
> In summary, right now co-existence of kdb with kdump seems to be your pain
> point. I would prefer that kdb just puts a break point on panic() and we move
> on. If there are more candidate
Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:38:34 +0900 Takenori Nagano wrote:
>> diff -uprN linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/kernel/sys.c linux-2.6.23-rc9/kernel/sys.c
>> --- linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/kernel/sys.c 2007-10-02 12:24:52.0
>> +0900
>> +++ linux-2.6.23-rc9
Randy Dunlap wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:38:50 +0900 Takenori Nagano wrote:
>
>> This patch implements new notifier function to panic_notifier_list. We can
>> change the list of order by debugfs.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> ---
>>
>
This patch implements new notifier function to panic_notifier_list. We can
change the list of order by debugfs.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
linux-2.6.23-rc9/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
---
This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
atomic_notifier_chain.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/include/linux/notifier.h
linux-2.6.23-rc9/include/linux/notifier.h
--- linux-2.6.23-rc
ier calls wdog_panic_handler().
ipmi_msghandler : notifier calls panic_event().
--
Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.k
calls wdog_panic_handler().
ipmi_msghandler : notifier calls panic_event().
--
Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
atomic_notifier_chain.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/include/linux/notifier.h
linux-2.6.23-rc9/include/linux/notifier.h
--- linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig
This patch implements new notifier function to panic_notifier_list. We can
change the list of order by debugfs.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
linux-2.6.23-rc9/arch/alpha/kernel/setup.c
--- linux
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:38:50 +0900 Takenori Nagano wrote:
This patch implements new notifier function to panic_notifier_list. We can
change the list of order by debugfs.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
* Returns seconds
Randy Dunlap wrote:
On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:38:34 +0900 Takenori Nagano wrote:
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/kernel/sys.c linux-2.6.23-rc9/kernel/sys.c
--- linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/kernel/sys.c 2007-10-02 12:24:52.0
+0900
+++ linux-2.6.23-rc9/kernel/sys.c2007-10-03 14:48
Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 08:38:05PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
In summary, right now co-existence of kdb with kdump seems to be your pain
point. I would prefer that kdb just puts a break point on panic() and we move
on. If there are more candidates down the line
Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Thu, Oct 04, 2007 at 08:38:34PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
This patch adds new notifier function tunable_notifier_chain. Its base is
atomic_notifier_chain.
Thanks,
---
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
diff -uprN linux-2.6.23-rc9.orig/include
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 06:26:35PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
>> Vivek Goyal wrote:
>> > So for the time being I think we can put RAS tools on die notifier list
>>> and if it runs into issues we can always think of creating a separate list.
>
Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 06:26:35PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote:
Vivek Goyal wrote:
So for the time being I think we can put RAS tools on die notifier list
and if it runs into issues we can always think of creating a separate list.
Few things come to mind.
- Why
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> So for the time being I think we can put RAS tools on die notifier list
> and if it runs into issues we can always think of creating a separate list.
>
> Few things come to mind.
>
> - Why there is a separate panic_notifier_list? Can't it be merged with
> die_chain?
Vivek Goyal wrote:
So for the time being I think we can put RAS tools on die notifier list
and if it runs into issues we can always think of creating a separate list.
Few things come to mind.
- Why there is a separate panic_notifier_list? Can't it be merged with
die_chain? die_val
Bernhard Walle wrote:
> * Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-08-14 10:34]:
>> Vivek Goyal wrote:
>>> On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 02:05:47PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> To sum up, couple of options come to mind.
>>>
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 02:05:47PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
>
>
> To sum up, couple of options come to mind.
>
> - Register all the RAS tools on die notifier and panic
> notifier lists with fairly high priority. Export list
> of RAS tools to user space and allow users
Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 02:05:47PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
To sum up, couple of options come to mind.
- Register all the RAS tools on die notifier and panic
notifier lists with fairly high priority. Export list
of RAS tools to user space and allow users to
Bernhard Walle wrote:
* Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-08-14 10:34]:
Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 02:05:47PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
To sum up, couple of options come to mind.
- Register all the RAS tools on die notifier and panic
notifier lists with fairly high
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Then I gave up to merge my patch to kdb, and I tried to send another patch to
>> kexec community. I can understand his opinion, but it is very difficult to
>> modify that kdump is called from pan
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Then I gave up to merge my patch to kdb, and I tried to send another patch to
kexec community. I can understand his opinion, but it is very difficult to
modify that kdump is called from panic_notifier. Because it has a reason
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> IMHO, most users don't use kdump, kdump users are only kernel developers and
>> enterprise users.
>
> Not at all. So far the only kdump related bug report I have seen
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi all,
IMHO, most users don't use kdump, kdump users are only kernel developers and
enterprise users.
Not at all. So far the only kdump related bug report I have seen has
been from fedora Core.
Sorry, I thought general
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>> Bernhard's idea (kdump uses panic_notifier) is very good for me. But it
>>> isn't
>>> good for kdump user, because they want to take a dump ASAP when panicked.
>>>
>> This one is better than registering kdump as one of the
Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bernhard's idea (kdump uses panic_notifier) is very good for me. But it
isn't
good for kdump user, because they want to take a dump ASAP when panicked.
This one is better than registering kdump as one of the users of a
Hi Vivek,
Vivek Goyal wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 05:47:18PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote:
>> * Vivek Goyal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-07-26 17:44]:
Of course, but that's why the patch doesn't change this by default but
gives the user the choice.
>>> What value will distro set
Hi Vivek,
Vivek Goyal wrote:
On Thu, Jul 26, 2007 at 05:47:18PM +0200, Bernhard Walle wrote:
* Vivek Goyal [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-07-26 17:44]:
Of course, but that's why the patch doesn't change this by default but
gives the user the choice.
What value will distro set it to by default?
0.
at the same time.
kdump_after_notifier = 0
-> panic()
-> crash_kexec(NULL)
kdump_after_notifier = 1
-> panic()
-> atomic_notifier_call_chain(_notifier_list, 0, buf);
-> crash_kexec(NULL)
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: K
at the same time.
kdump_after_notifier = 0
- panic()
- crash_kexec(NULL)
kdump_after_notifier = 1
- panic()
- atomic_notifier_call_chain(panic_notifier_list, 0, buf);
- crash_kexec(NULL)
Signed-off-by: Takenori Nagano [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Kazuto Miyoshi [EMAIL PROTECTED
54 matches
Mail list logo
