From: Akio Takebe Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH]: kexec: framework and i386 Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 10:10:36 +0900 Message-ID: <5DC6673BE47612takebe_akio@jp.fujitsu.com> References: <20060407074234.GA19846@verge.net.au> <20060417060617.GA20303@verge.net.au> <58C6650A4C9627takebe_akio@jp.fujitsu.com> <200604231545.23238.mark.williamson@cl.cam.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200604231545.23238.mark.williamson@cl.cam.ac.uk> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Mark Williamson Cc: Magnus Damm , Horms , Akio Takebe , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Hi, Mark Thank you for your comments! >I think kdump, in general, is a nifty solution for supporting crashdumps, >since using a separate kernel for crashdumps gives you the best possible >opportunity to complete them successfully. > >Integrating with the Linux crashdump infrastructure seems like a good idea. >It doesn't stop other dom0 OSes using their own crashdump infrastructure, >but >with kdump we have a chance of getting a dump even if Xen itself crashes >(whilst admittedly rare, such crashes are something you'd want to get >debugged quickly!) > Yes, I also agree. >So, essentially, I think the idea is good - I'll try and take a look through >the code. > I also try to read a new patch. http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2006-04/msg00968.html Can kexec hypecll use Hypercall 11 or 30? I think using not hypercall but dom0_op is good idea because using kexec is rare. :-) Best Regards, Akio Takebe