Re: [RFC v5 1/4] pstore/blk: new support logger for block devices

2019-01-24 Thread liaoweixiong
On 2019-01-24 02:19, Aaro Koskinen wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 04:53:48PM +0800, liaoweixiong wrote: >> On 2019-01-18 08:12, Kees Cook wrote: MTD (drivers/mtd/mtdoops.c). >>> >>> Would mtdoops get dropped in favor of pstore/blk, or do they not share >>> features? >> >> We can sho

Re: [RFC v5 1/4] pstore/blk: new support logger for block devices

2019-01-23 Thread Aaro Koskinen
Hi, On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 04:53:48PM +0800, liaoweixiong wrote: > On 2019-01-18 08:12, Kees Cook wrote: > >> MTD (drivers/mtd/mtdoops.c). > > > > Would mtdoops get dropped in favor of pstore/blk, or do they not share > > features? > > We can show them what pstore/blk do. I think they will be i

Re: [RFC v5 1/4] pstore/blk: new support logger for block devices

2019-01-19 Thread liaoweixiong
On 2019-01-18 08:12, Kees Cook wrote: > On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:01 AM liaoweixiong > wrote: >> >> pstore_blk is similar to pstore_ram, but dump log to block devices >> rather than persistent ram. >> >> Why should we need pstore_blk? >> 1. Most embedded intelligent equipment have no persistent ram

Re: [RFC v5 1/4] pstore/blk: new support logger for block devices

2019-01-17 Thread Kees Cook
On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 4:01 AM liaoweixiong wrote: > > pstore_blk is similar to pstore_ram, but dump log to block devices > rather than persistent ram. > > Why should we need pstore_blk? > 1. Most embedded intelligent equipment have no persistent ram, which > increases costs. We perfer to cheaper

[RFC v5 1/4] pstore/blk: new support logger for block devices

2019-01-07 Thread liaoweixiong
pstore_blk is similar to pstore_ram, but dump log to block devices rather than persistent ram. Why should we need pstore_blk? 1. Most embedded intelligent equipment have no persistent ram, which increases costs. We perfer to cheaper solutions, like block devices. In fast, there is already a sample