My position on general ``RAS'' tool support infrastructure
randy.dunlap at oracle.com
Mon Sep 17 21:38:53 EDT 2007
On Thu, 13 Sep 2007 07:21:10 -0600 Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Pete/Piet Delaney <pete at bluelane.com> writes:
> > Jason, Eric:
> > Did you read Keith Owens suggestion on RAS tools from:
Yes. and I re-read it.
There are several things in Keith's email that make sense:
a. all RAS tools should use a common interface
b. it's not the kernel's job to decide which RAS tool runs first
Eric makes some good points too. I'm mostly similar to Eric:
paranoid about trusting software/hardware after a panic (or oops).
So if someone wants to use multiple RAS tools on a panic event,
enabling an admin to set priorities is OK with me, but I'll only
trust the first one that is used, and even that one may have
problems. IOW, I don't see a big need to support multiple RAS
tools at one time. (speaking for myself)
> So if someone who is suggesting an implementation can absorb
> and understand the requirements of the different groups and come
> up with solutions that meet the requirements of the different projects
> I think progress can be made. That as far as I know takes talent.
More information about the kexec