Linux kernel crash dumps (LKCD) and PowerPC ports.
Greetings.
Quoted 1 line
From what I able to find from some searching around, the implementation
by MCLX ("http://oss.missioncriticallinux.com/projects/mcore/") is being carried on at http://lists.insecure.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/Feb/0987.html.
Looking at these patches, I can only see x86 architecture support for in memory kernel crash dump support. Is anyone actively working on the PowerPC architecture?
Best regards,
-Arun.
Please look at the lkcd-devel mailing archives. There is at least one group working on a PPC port of LKCD
http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=2726
--Matt
Quoted 21 lines · Arun Dharankar
Greetings.
Quoted 1 line
From what I able to find from some searching around, the implementation
by MCLX ("http://oss.missioncriticallinux.com/projects/mcore/") is being carried on at http://lists.insecure.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/Feb/0987.html.
Looking at these patches, I can only see x86 architecture support for in memory kernel crash dump support. Is anyone actively working on the PowerPC architecture?
Best regards,
(quoted diff) +0
-2-Arun. -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/
Matt, thanks for the pointers!
Looking at those sites, it appears that the development at "http://lists.insecure.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/Feb/0987.html." which I had pointed is based on the SGI's dump scheme. Same for the one you pointed to.
The other scheme I poinited to (from Mission Critical Linux/MCLX) seems to have some strong points too. Any pointers to discussions about why the LKCD work seems to more active than the MCLX one?
Best regards,
-Arun.
Quoted 22 lines · Matt D. Robinson
Please look at the lkcd-devel mailing archives. There is at least one group working on a PPC port of LKCD
http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=2726--Matt
Quoted 14 lines · Arun Dharankar
Greetings.
Quoted 1 line
From what I able to find from some searching around, the implementation
by MCLX ("http://oss.missioncriticallinux.com/projects/mcore/") is being carried on at
http://lists.insecure.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/Feb/0987.html.Looking at these patches, I can only see x86 architecture support for in memory kernel crash dump support. Is anyone actively working on the PowerPC architecture?
Best regards,
-Arun.
Quoted 11 lines · Arun Dharankar
Matt, thanks for the pointers!
Looking at those sites, it appears that the development at "http://lists.insecure.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/Feb/0987.html." which I had pointed is based on the SGI's dump scheme. Same for the one you pointed to.
The other scheme I poinited to (from Mission Critical Linux/MCLX) seems to have some strong points too. Any pointers to discussions about why the LKCD work seems to more active than the MCLX one?
I don't think there has been such a discussion. The Mission Critical hackers were hired by RedHat and Dave Anderson continues to work on crash and making it available at:
ftp://people.redhat.com/anderson
He's had about a release per month. I thought MCLX crash has some strong points also. After I enhanced LKCD to support the ia64 I fixed MCLX crash so it could read the new LKCD crash dumps which are no longer monotonically increasing in memory. I did this to support NUMA systems which can have more memory than swap space. This way the most important memory can be saved first.
If you read the lkcd-devel mailing list you can read our discussion on maintaining MLCX crash on the lkcd cvs tree.
"And imnsho, debugging the kernel on a source
level is the way to do it."
Linus
-piet
Quoted 33 lines
Best regards,
-Arun.Quoted 22 lines · Matt D. Robinson
Please look at the lkcd-devel mailing archives. There is at least one group working on a PPC port of LKCD
http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=2726--Matt
Quoted 14 lines · Arun Dharankar
Greetings.
Quoted 1 line
From what I able to find from some searching around, the implementation
by MCLX ("http://oss.missioncriticallinux.com/projects/mcore/") is being carried on at
http://lists.insecure.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/Feb/0987.html.Looking at these patches, I can only see x86 architecture support for in memory kernel crash dump support. Is anyone actively working on the PowerPC architecture?
Best regards,
-Arun.-
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/
Signature · 1 line
[email protected]
Piet, thanks for the reply!
Some of the points that I found attractive (among other points):
- Overall a smaller time to reboot and save the dump, and bring the system back to working state.
- Does not require local disk to save the dump on the way down during a panic - works on a diskless system.
- No need for a dump/swap device.
Looking at the MCLX site, the last patch is on 2.4.17 only. Also, the PowerPC port is a bit broken. Is anyone maintaining this part of the MCLX scheme, and is available else where?
Best regards,
-Arun.
Quoted 43 lines
Quoted 9 lines
Looking at those sites, it appears that the development at "http://lists.insecure.org/lists/linux-kernel/2003/Feb/0987.html." which I had pointed is based on the SGI's dump scheme. Same for the one you pointed to.
The other scheme I poinited to (from Mission Critical Linux/MCLX) seems to have some strong points too. Any pointers to discussions about why the LKCD work seems to more active than the MCLX one?
I don't think there has been such a discussion. The Mission Critical hackers were hired by RedHat and Dave Anderson continues to work on crash and making it available at:
ftp://people.redhat.com/anderson
He's had about a release per month. I thought MCLX crash has some strong points also. After I enhanced LKCD to support the ia64 I fixed MCLX crash so it could read the new LKCD crash dumps which are no longer monotonically increasing in memory. I did this to support NUMA systems which can have more memory than swap space. This way the most important memory can be saved first.
If you read the lkcd-devel mailing list you can read our discussion on maintaining MLCX crash on the lkcd cvs tree.
"And imnsho, debugging the kernel on a source
level is the way to do it."
Linus-piet
Quoted 10 lines
Best regards,
-Arun.Quoted 6 lines · Matt D. Robinson
Please look at the lkcd-devel mailing archives. There is at least one group working on a PPC port of LKCD
http://sourceforge.net/mail/?group_id=2726--Matt