On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 06:26:35PM +0900, Takenori Nagano wrote: > Vivek Goyal wrote: > > So for the time being I think we can put RAS tools on die notifier list > > and if it runs into issues we can always think of creating a separate list. > > > > Few things come to mind. > > > > - Why there is a separate panic_notifier_list? Can't it be merged with > > die_chain? die_val already got one of the event type as PANIC. If there > > are no specific reasons then we should merge the two lists. Registering > > RAS tools on a single list is easier. > > I think it is difficult, because die_chain is defined by each architecture. > I think die_chain is arch independent definition (kernel/die_notifier.c)? But anyway, to begin with it can be done only for panic_notifier. > > - Modify Kdump to register on die_chain list. > > - Modify Kdb to register on die_chain list. > > - Export all the registered members of die_chain through sysfs along with > > their priorities. Priorities should be modifiable. Most likely one > > shall have to introduce additional field in struct notifier_block. This > > field will be a string as an identifier of the user registerd. e.g > > "Kdump", "Kdb" etc. > > > > Now user will be able to view all the die_chain users through sysfs and > > be able to modify the order in which these should run by modifying their > > priority. Hence all the RAS tools can co-exist. > > This is my image of your proposal. > > - Print current order > > # cat /sys/class/misc/debug/panic_notifier_list > priority name > 1 IPMI > 2 watchdog > 3 Kdb > 4 Kdump > I think Bernhard's suggestion looks better here. I noticed that /sys/kernel/debug is already present. So how about following. /sys/kernel/debug/kdump/priority /sys/kernel/debug/kdb/priority /sys/kernel/debug/IPMI/priority I think at some point of time we shall have to create another file say description. /sys/kernel/debug/IPMI/description Which can tell what does this tool do? Other a user might not have any clue how to prioritize various things. Thanks Vivek
