2009/11/17 Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@xxxxxxxxx>: > Take a look at my mails where I describe different complications we have > in our system. We really want to have an OOPS/panic + our environment > stuff to go together, at once. This makes things so much simpler. > > Really, what is the problem providing this trivial panic-note > capability, where user-space can give the kernel a small buffer, and ask > the kernel to print this buffer at the oops/panic time. Very simple and > elegant, and just solves the problem. > > Why perversions with time-stamps, separate storages are needed? > > IOW, you suggest a complicated approach, and demand explaining why we do > not go for it. Simply because it is unnecessarily complex. I don't think it's a complicated approach we are talking of a system log like syslog with a temporal information, nothing more. > This patch solves the problem gracefully, and I'd rather demand you to point what > is the technical problem with the patches. > Simply because I think that we should avoid to include in the kernel things we can do in a simply way at user space level. I think this patch is well done but it's one of the patches that are solutions "for embedded only", but it's only my opinion. Marco -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
