On 05/02, Dave Anderson wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > > On 05/02, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > > > > > > On 05/02, Dave Anderson wrote: > > > > > > > > > So how should I define LOCAL_ACTIVE() ? As for this patchset I can > > > > > equally do > > > > > > > > > > #define LOCAL_ACTIVE() ((pc->flags & (LIVE_SYSTEM|LIVEDUMP)) == > > > > > LIVE_SYSTEM) > > > > > > > > > > I do not like this because I still think that LOCAL_ACTIVE doesn't need to > > > > > know about LIVEDUMP added by this series, but I won't argue. > > > > > > > > I have no problem with LOCAL_ACTIVE() being defined like that. > > > > > > OK, so I will keep it for now... > > > > Ah, when I re-read I suspect I misunderstood... So you want me to define LOCAL_ACTIVE() as > > > > LIVE_SYSTEM && !LIVE_RAMDUMP > > > > right? > > Yes. OK. Will change this too and send v3 tommorrow. BTW, please tell me if you prefer the cumulative patch, I feel that spam this list too much. Oleg. -- Crash-utility mailing list Crash-utility@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/crash-utility
