On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 05:07:14PM +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote: > Robin Holt wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 09:33:46AM +0900, Hidetoshi Seto wrote: > >> Robin Holt wrote: > > ... > >> Do you mean that the 2nd kernel should be able to handle MCA/INIT from its > >> boot up? I guess the word PROM is nearly equal to PAL/SAL firmware, if so > >> then I don't think there are good generic interface/procedure could be > >> useful here. Do you have any concrete idea? > > > > No concrete ideas. Just a really uneasy feeling whenever the INIT > > is disabled. > > Don't worry, don't be afraid. > Again, my patches don't disable INIT until kdump is invoked. > (And if kdump is invoked via INIT, it have already masked at the begging > of INIT handlers.) The concern is that any time we prevent SAL from receiving control during an MCA/INIT, we reduce the maintainability of the machine. Having them masked at any time results in the NMI/INIT not recording the PROM record which we use to diagnose where the hang is. In other patches, you implemented a do-nothing handler. Could that be used? Alternatively, when the machine is first booted, the handler is defined by SAL as a SAL routine. Could you record that during kernel boot and then just set the handler back to the SAL provided one prior to starting the kexec kernel boot? At that point, the machine is more like the first boot. Now that I think about this, this alternative seems fairly attractive. Thanks, Robin
