On Mon, 18 May 2020 21:25:09 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote: > It's pretty clear, but even then, first of all I doubt this is the case > for many of the places that you've sprinkled the annotation on, and > secondly it actually hides useful information. > > Regardless of the support issue, I think this hiding of information is > also problematic. > > I really think we'd all be better off if you just made a sysfs file (I > mistyped debugfs in some other email, sorry, apparently you didn't see > the correction in time) that listed which device(s) crashed and how many > times. That would actually be useful. Because honestly, if a random > device crashed for some random reason, that's pretty much a non-event. > If it keeps happening, then we might even want to know about it. Johannes - have you seen devlink health? I think we should just use that interface, since it supports all the things you're requesting, rather than duplicate it in sysfs.
