lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5] ramoops: use pstore interface
From
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Marco Stornelli
<marco.stornelli@gmail.com> wrote:
> Il 09/04/2012 23:42, Luck, Tony ha scritto:
>
>>> The patch breaks ramoops module unloading.  Tony says there's "no
>>> credible end-user case" for this and Marco promptly provided one,
>>> which was ignored.
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure that I understood Marco's use case. He said:
>>
>>> First of all ramoops was born mainly for debug purpose and
>>> to help the maintainability of a product. I used it in systems
>>> where the uptime (so no reboot) was important. So it can be
>>> very useful for me load the module, gather logs and unload it
>>> for example. A kernel panic is not recoverable so the reboot
>>> is needed but it's not always true for a kernel oops.
>>
>>
>> In the non-crashed oops case ... aren't all the logs you need
>> in /var/log/messages?
>>
>> -Tony
>
>
> Maybe you right, but it could be useful to have a "single log point"
> especially for automatic/semi-automatic log gathering. I'm not sure we can
> *always* read from messages in case of non-crashed oops. Sure, it will be
> possible after a reboot, but if /var was mounted with tmpfs (on embedded
> systems it's possible :)) we have no log.
>
> PS: It's only a brainstorming on all the possible situation :)

Do you feel that this lack of unloading is still a sufficient reason
to NAK the ramoops patch?

-Kees

--
Kees Cook
ChromeOS Security
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-10 18:13    [W:0.056 / U:0.472 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site