----- Original Message ----- > Hello Dave, > > On 09/09/2014 03:06 AM, Dave Anderson wrote: > > I also don't like the idea of making so many changes to the behavior > > of so many architecture-neutral commands -- and then restricting it > > to x86_64 only. > > I can only take x86_64 into consideration, for I am not clear about > other architecture's cpu hot remove. I put the architecture check in > the new API, check_offline_cpu, we can involve other architecture that > supports cpu hot remove. >From the perspective of the crash utility, a cpu is either online or offline, right? What would be the architecture-specific issue? > > > > Many of the changes reflect the contents of per-cpu data structures > > of offlined cpus, but even though the cpu is currently offline, the > > data structures still exist. Why prevent the user from viewing their > > contents? > > I think just showing online cpu's data is reasonable. Why? Give me an example as to when it is/was a problem? > What about adding a internal crash variables (used by command set) to > hide/show offline cpu's data? I suppose that could be done, but again, in my opinion there is no compelling reason to do so. I could be wrong, but aside from maybe "help -r", it seems that you are trying to answer a question that nobody's asking. Dave -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
