On 7/6/2023 10:40 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Mon, Jul 3, 2023 at 3:06 PM Trilok Soni <quic_tsoni@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 7/2/2023 1:29 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 30/06/2023 18:04, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
We don't add layers when they are not needed, and never when there is no
actual user. If you need the extra "complexity" later, then add it
later when it is needed as who knows when that will ever be.
Please redo this series based on that, thanks.
My bigger issue with this whole series is what would this all look
like if every SoC vendor upstreamed their own custom dumping
mechanism. That would be a mess. (I have similar opinions on the
$soc-vendor hypervisors.)
Mukesh,
LPC CFP is still open. There will be also Android and Kernel Debugging
LPC microconference tracks. Coming with a unified solution could be a
great topic for LPC. Solutions targeting only one user are quite often
frowned upon.
LPC is far out and in November. Can we not have others speak up if they
have the similar solution now? We can expand this to linux-kernel and
ask for the other SOC vendors to chime in. I am sure that we may have
existing solutions which came in for the one user first like Intel RDT
if I remember. I am sure ARM MPAM usecase was present at that time but
Intel RDT based solution which was x86 specific but accepted.
RDT predated MPAM. resctrl is the kernel feature, and it supports
Intel and AMD which are not identical. resctrl is being (extensively)
refactored to add in MPAM support.
You are not the first here like Intel RDT, so I fail to see the
parallel with minidump. We have an existing logging to persistent
storage mechanism which is pstore. You should integrate into that
rather than grafting something on to the side or underneath.
Mukesh will chime in once he looks at the hwtracing suggested by Linus W
and see if it fits. Mukesh seems have already looked at pstore and
discussions/patches are there w/ pstore logic I believe, but it is okay
if they are not perfect if we are still not decided on the right
framework. Best to decide if the existing frameworks fits or not or we
need to create the new one.
I would still prefer if other SOC vendors chime in here, since I am sure
in the Mobile and Embedded world various SOCs may have requirements to
get specific portion of the ramdump only for the quick analysis and
meeting the storage requirements on the device for its collection.
As mentioned on another patch, we are fine the submit abstract at LPC
debug MC, but I would like the framework discussion to continue so that
we can decide during the LPC that either existing frameworks fits the
needs or they need to be extended or new fwk is needed.
---Trilok Soni
