On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 08:32:42AM -0500, Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > > On 10/30/2014 09:58 PM, Hedi Berriche wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 17:06 Prarit Bhargava wrote: > > | There have been several times where I have had to rebuild a kernel to > > | cause a panic when hitting a WARN() in the code in order to get a crash > > | dump from a system. Sometimes this is easy to do, other times (such as > > | in the case of a remote admin) it is not trivial to send new images to the > > | user. > > | > > | A much easier method would be a switch to change the WARN() over to a > > | panic. This makes debugging easier in that I can now test the actual > > | image the WARN() was seen on and I do not have to engage in remote > > | debugging. > > > > Do we want to leave it to usersspace[1] to ensure panic_on_warn is out > > of the way in when the kdump kernel boots? or would a self-contained > > approach be more preferable i.e. test whether we're a kdump kernel > > before bothering with panic_on_warn? > > Hmm ... this is a good point. Vivek, do you have a preference? I'm willing to > code it either way. I should be able to put in a is_kdump_kernel() check > without any problems but I'm not sure if that is the right thing to do here. > I think it will make sense to modify user space scripts to get rid of panic_on_warn for kdump kernel. Thanks Vivek
