[PATCH V4] notifier/panic: Introduce panic_notifier_filter

Guilherme G. Piccoli gpiccoli at igalia.com
Mon Mar 7 06:25:30 PST 2022


On 07/03/2022 11:04, bhe at redhat.com wrote:
> [...]
> Ah, sorry, I even didn't notice that. That's awesome if we can make use
> of that. While I still have concerns:
> 

Thanks, nice that you liked the idea.

> 1) about those we have decided to take out from panic notifier list and
> put before kdump, e.g the Hypver-V notifier, how will we do with it? Are
> we going to handle them as we have discussed?
> 

While implementing that I will think of something, but if
understood/remember correctly Hyper-V gonna be one of the first to run
in the first notifier list proposed by Petr - so we might still use
ordering by priority there, having Hyper-V being the first heh

> 2) Combing and settling priority for all existing panic notifier looks
> great, even though it will take some effort. How about the later newly
> added one? How can we guarantee that those new notifiers are getting
> appropriate priority to mark their order? Sometime we even don't know
> a new panic notifier is added since code change may be made in any
> component or driver.
> 

This is a great point! How to do it? One idea is to have a special
registering function for panic notifiers that checks for priority field
missing, and good documentation is a good idea as well, always.

But if you / others have other suggestions, let me know - appreciate that.
Cheers,


Guilherme



More information about the kexec mailing list