From: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@xxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2022 8:40 AM > > On 08/02/2022 21:31, bhe@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > [...] > >> So, what are the opinions from kdump maintainers about this idea? > >> Baoquan / Vivek / Dave, does it make sense to you? Do you have any > >> suggestions/concerns to add on top of Petr draft? > > > > Yeah, it's reasonable. As I replied to Michael in another thread, I > > think splitting the current notifier list is a good idea. At least the > > code to archieve hyper-V's goal with panic_notifier is a little odd and > > should be taken out and execute w/o conditional before kdump, and maybe > > some others Petr has combed out. > > > > For those which will be switched on with the need of adding panic_notifier > > or panic_print into cmdline, the heavy users like HATAYAMA and Masa can > > help check. > > > > For Petr's draft code, does it mean hyper-V need another knob to trigger > > the needed notifiers? Will you go with the draft direclty? Hyper-V now > > runs panic notifiers by default, just a reminder. > > > > Hi Baoquan, thanks for your comments. > > I'll need to study the Hyper-V code and how it's done today - Let me know if you need any assistance or explanation as you look at the Hyper-V code. Michael Kelley Principal SW Engineer Linux Systems Group Microsoft Corporation > I guess > most part of this implementation will be studying the notifiers we have > currently, split them among the 3 new notifiers and comb them into > patches, so they can be reviewed for all relevant maintainers (who know > the code we are changing). > > I'm not sure if I go directly with the draft, likely it'll have some > changes, but the draft should be the skeleton of the new implementation. > Specially if you/other kdump maintainers agree it's a good idea =) > > Cheers, > > > Guilherme
