eeh patch

[Nathan Fontenot]

On Tue, 2004-03-16 at 15:39, Greg KH wrote:
> Ok, sorry if anyone got offended by this comment, I didn't mean to be so
> snippy.  I apologize for this.

No offense taken.  EEH always seems to be a hot topic.

>
> But my main point stands.  If you are going to try to invent a new way
> to talk to the kernel from userspace, please take about 10 deep breaths
> and back away from the keyboard.  Then go see how the kernel does things
> today and please please please use that interface instead.
>
This wasn't an attempt to create a new way to talk to the kernel.  I was
simply following another model I had found that is currently in the
ppc64 kernel.  AFAIK, procfs, sysfs and syscalls are the only ways to
communicate with the kernel.  How would you suggest we notify a
user-space application that an EEH event has occured?

The goal of the code is to reduce the number of panics resulting from
EEH events.  To do this we wanted to hot-unplug network devices when
they received an EEH event.  I figure doing this for network devices
is safe, other devices this would be a big no-no for.

If there is a way to unplug a device from within the kernel please let
me know?

I tried to do this using some of the routines I found in the kernel, but
not with any good results.

> This is only about the 240th time this same topic has come up in the
> past on any one of a zillion different kernel mailing lists
> (linux-kernel, linux-hotplug-devel, etc.)  Feel free to read the
> archives of those lists to see what Linus thinks of interfaces like you
> just created, and what I think of /proc.  So again, if you are going to
> be writing kernel code, please do your homework first before adding new
> stuff.
>
> And if you think you do want to create a new interface, please, bring it
> up in linux-kernel where it belongs.  There is no reason the ppc64 tree
> should be doing things on their own for such an important interaction.
> We should spread the goodness to all other arches too.
>

I brought this up here because this deals with EEH, something that is
definitely ppc64 specific.  No reason to inflict EEH on all the other
arches :)

> Again, sorry for any hurt feelings that my post might have caused, I was
> only critiquing the code that was published.
>
> greg k-h
--


** Sent via the linuxppc64-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/