Thread (26 messages) read the whole thread 26 messages, 12 authors, 2011-06-24

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.


Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help