Re: [PATCH]: Add Network Sysrq Support
From: John Haxby <hidden>
Date: 2011-06-22 18:57:15
On 22 Jun 2011, at 18:39, Prarit Bhargava wrote:
quoted
Although I wasn't sure that it could happen, it's also possible that the cryptographic functions can get in your way. xt_SYSRQ does its best to avoid problems by pre-allocating everything it can so there is as little as possible to do when it is needed, but it is possible for it to fail.My running theory as to the failure is that the CPU that took the sysrq is also the CPU that was having problems that resulted in the "slow down" of the system. On a known-good system, xt_SYSRQ behaves properly AFAICT. It functions exactly the way we want it to. So ... I read the following discussion of xt_SYSRQ from last year: http://www.kerneltrap.com/mailarchive/linux-netdev/2010/4/21/6275199/thread And it seems there were no technical objections to the code, but there were other concerns. davem -- as I don't monitor this list, are you indicating that you are more amenable to this code being accepted upstream? Or is that part of the debate still ongoing?
I've just re-read the thread and I'm reminded that I never did submit the xt_SYSRQ hash update I mentioned at the end of the thread.