* Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-08-14 10:48]: > Bernhard Walle wrote: > > * Takenori Nagano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-08-14 10:34]: > >> Vivek Goyal wrote: > >>> On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 02:05:47PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> To sum up, couple of options come to mind. > >>> > >>> - Register all the RAS tools on die notifier and panic > >>> notifier lists with fairly high priority. Export list > >>> of RAS tools to user space and allow users to decide the > >>> order of execution and priority of RAS tools. > >>> > >>> - Create a separate RAS tool notifier list (ras_tool_notifer_list). > >>> All the RAS tools register on this list. This list gets priority > >>> over die or panic notifier list. User decides the oder of execution > >>> of RAS tools. > >>> > >>> Here assumption is that above list will not be exported to modules. > >>> All the RAS tools will be in kernel and they always get a priority > >>> to inspect an event. > >>> > >>> What do others think? > >> Very good idea. But there is a problem how to give default priority to RAS > >> tools. > >> > >> How about priority changeable notifier_list? User can change list order > >> dynamically if they want. Of course, we have to give highest priority to > >> kdump > >> by default. It is very useful for users who want to use some RAS tools. > > > > I think that was the idea of the first “-” (“export list of RAS tools > > to user space”). > > Ah, sorry. > > I think first idea is very good. How export the list? (sysfs? procfs?)
I think sysfs would be a good solution, e.g. assigning each RAS tool a priority from 0 to 100 or something like this. Thanks, Bernhard - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
