Hi Bill, On 02/20/2009 05:31 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Mark Hamzy (hamzy@xxxxxxxxxx) said: >> Here is a patch for reIPL support for the 390. This allows automated >> rebooting into the installed partition instead of back into the installer. > > I've probably asked this before, but why do this and not do > kexec for x86-based boxes? No, this has never been asked before. Here are the reasons why we chose reipl instead of kexec: In rare situations, devices might behave differently since kexec doesn't perform a subsystem reset. Using reipl ensures that a reboot after finishing installation phase 2 behaves as expected and reboots the currently running system. With kexec it would require exactly the same treatment of /sys/firmware/reipl/... as we do with our reipl support in anaconda and get it right in the first place. For reipl both the backend in the kernel talking to the firmware and our support in anaconda are very well tested and known to work. Steffen Linux on System z Development IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter Geschäftsführung: Erich Baier Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294 _______________________________________________ Anaconda-devel-list mailing list Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
