new kernel ... / meaning of stable-tracking

Michael 'Mickey' Lauer mickey at
Sun Sep 28 07:55:45 CEST 2008

Am Samstag, den 27.09.2008, 19:07 -0300 schrieb Werner Almesberger:
> Michael 'Mickey' Lauer wrote:
> > I would not protest on removing the system runlevel 6 trigger,
> Good, that's already half the messiness :-)
> > however I
> > would certainly veto on removing the 8 seconds emergency shutdown, since
> > that's for cases where userland is entirely unresponsive (no daemon to
> > catch that state expected).
> Hmm, how about solving the problem that the daemon is unresponsive
> instead ?
> If you separate it from the rest of the framework, the code will be
> simple, small, and won't break easily because of some unrelated
> changes. If you mlockall, you're immune to out of memory conditions
> or a file system failure. If you raise the scheduling priority high
> enough, you'll win even against fork bombs.

Yes, we could do that. My opinion on keeping this _emergency_ power down
timeout for _when there is no userland running [anymore] at all_ remains
unchanged though.


More information about the openmoko-kernel mailing list