On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 06:18:31AM -0700, Jay Lan wrote: [..] > >>> 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 > > Why separate priority files is better than a central file? > At least i think you get a grand picture of priority being > defined for all parties with a central file? > I thought of couple of reasons. - A very different syntax to modify the priority. - Separate directories allow easy future extensions in terms of more files. For example, putting a small "description" file in each dir where each registered user can specify what does it do. But I agree that a single file is good for consolidated view. As bernhard suggested, may be we should also implement a read only file where one will get a consolidated view. > What do we decide priority if more than one component has > the same priority value? > I think first come first serve would be appropriate in this case instead of returning -EINVAL. Thanks Vivek
