[Top] [All Lists]

[patch] netconsole-2.4.10-B1

To: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [patch] netconsole-2.4.10-B1
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 08:38:51 +0200 (CEST)
Cc: <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0109261635190.957-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: <mingo@xxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:

> Don't you think it would be useful to have some reserved memory for
> the netconsole use ?
> It would be nice to have a guarantee that messages are sent over
> network even if the system is under real OOM.

yep, that is very useful indeed.

i've implemented a private emergency pool of 32 packets that we try to
keep filled as much as possible, and which one we use only if GFP_ATOMIC
fails. The new patch can downloaded from:

the patch also includes Andrew Morton's suggestion to add the
HAVE_POLL_CONTROLLER define for easier network-driver integration. The
eepro100.c changes now use this define.

the new utilities-tarball is at:

this includes Andreas Dilger's netconsole-server script. (i've done a
minor modification to the script, it insmods the netconsole module with
the parameters.)

there is one more thing we could do: we could also allocate the skb on
stack in extreme cases. This adds noticeable latency though, since the skb
xmit has to be polled for completion as well [this can be done with the
current ->poll_controller() method], but this way the netconsole could be
self-sufficient and would be completely independent of the VM.

reports, suggestions, comments welcome,


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>