Re: [PATCH v2 08/13] tracing: Improve panic/die notifiers

2022-08-16 Thread Alan Stern
elf == _die_notifier && ev != DIE_OOPS) > return NOTIFY_DONE; > > ftrace_dump(ftrace_dump_on_oops); > > return NOTIFY_DONE; > } Or better yet: if (ftrace_dump_on_oops) { /* The die notifier requires DIE_OOPS to trigger */

Re: [PATCH V2] notifier/panic: Introduce panic_notifier_filter

2022-01-06 Thread Alan Stern
altering a lot of call sites. :-( > @@ -162,10 +194,16 @@ int atomic_notifier_chain_unregister(struct > atomic_notifier_head *nh, > struct notifier_block *n) > { > unsigned long flags; > - int ret; > + int ret = 0; > > spi

Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm 1/2] kexec jump -v12: kexec jump

2008-07-12 Thread Alan Stern
there be a better way? Certainly but to prove it out starting with a block device wrapper is a trivial way to go. This sounds like a solution to a non-existent problem. Alan Stern ___ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http

Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm 1/2] kexec jump -v12: kexec jump

2008-07-11 Thread Alan Stern
of requests to filter through an extra software layer is a clumsy way of accomplishing this. There ought to be a better approach. Alan Stern ___ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9

2008-05-15 Thread Alan Stern
the device driver can reclaim and reinitialize it, but the hardware will not be touched. device_reattach reattaches the driver to the hardware. How would these differ from the already-existing remove and probe methods? Alan Stern ___ kexec mailing list

Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9

2008-03-22 Thread Alan Stern
, then it should just turn off ACPI before passing control to the image kernel. Then the image kernel can turn ACPI back on and all should be well. If you do this, does the NVS region still need to be preserved? Alan Stern ___ kexec mailing list kexec

Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9

2008-03-19 Thread Alan Stern
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Eric W. Biederman wrote: Alan Stern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Could it be connected with the way the boot kernel hands control over to the image kernel? Presumably ACPI isn't prepared to deal with that sort of thing during a boot from S5. It would have to be fooled

Re: [linux-pm] [PATCH -mm] kexec jump -v9

2008-03-12 Thread Alan Stern
, but it ought to be possible somehow... Alan Stern ___ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec

Re: [linux-pm] Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2 -mm] kexec based hibernation -v3: kexec jump

2007-09-22 Thread Alan Stern
probably more complicated than this, with weird interactions between the firmware and the various ACPI methods. Nevertheless, the main idea seems valid. Alan Stern ___ kexec mailing list kexec@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo