On Wed, 2015-07-29 at 18:50 +0900, Roger Shimizu wrote: > Dear Ian, > > Thanks for your response! > > I'd like to ask whether you could offer the "Reviewed-by" for my > first > patch of Bug#793786? > (0001-advance-the-timing-of-insmod-netconsole.patch) > You must be a netconsole user that understand the reasoning why to > load netconsole module with param should be earlier than calling > "load_modules" routine.
I'm afraid I'm not, the pinnacle of my understanding of netconsole was back when I wrote that blog post and basically everything I knew (which wasn't much) was written there. I haven't used it much since that debugging incident (although I keep thinking I should deploy it properly). Is the 1st patch basically because if netconsole is (or might be) listed in the /etc/initramfs-tools/modules then it is loaded with whatever options are given there and so when you come to do the load in /sbin/init it is already loaded and present? In which case that does seem to make sense, yes. Does netconsole.netconsole=FOO (which is really <module>.<param>=<value>, the module and param just happen to have the same name) on the command line not get honoured by the load inside load_modules too? Even if it is then netconsole= is a nice convenience shortcut, so I think that your first patch probably makes sense, at least so far as I understand the implications. Ian. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org