Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2015 18:29:15 -0500 From: Benjamin Kaduk <bjkfbsd@gmail.com> To: Rui Paulo <rpaulo@me.com> Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, Rui Paulo <rpaulo@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r278479 - in head: etc sys/kern Message-ID: <CAJ5_RoDTss2BuRWAyjeT6oC_hBLU_hjGJXriJ5Rd5eK3CnVUMQ@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <bc7b9fa5-40fd-4d87-88d7-1e7a616561d8@me.com> References: <bc7b9fa5-40fd-4d87-88d7-1e7a616561d8@me.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Rui Paulo <rpaulo@me.com> wrote: > On Feb 09, 2015, at 03:16 PM, Benjamin Kaduk <bjkfbsd@gmail.com> wrote: > > > What advantage does putting this in devd have over a standalone daemon for > crash reporting? Is it just the ease of implementation to leverage the > existing infrastructure? > > > Well, I want to automatically inspect all the programs that crashed in a > given system. I don't see how you can do that with a standalone daemon. > Or maybe I didn't understand what you meant. > I think you have misunderstood what I was trying to ask. We could in principle write a new daemon, call it crash-reporterd for now, and have the kernel notify that daemon whenever any program on the system crashes. But writing the infrastructure to support that would be a bunch of work, and we already have devd set up to get notifications from the kernel, so it is much faster to implement crash reporting in devd, even though crashes in software have nothing to do with device changes. The question boils down to: is the time saved by implementing it this way worth the tradeoff of architectural purity. I don't have an opinion myself, I just want to make sure the question is considered. -Ben
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ5_RoDTss2BuRWAyjeT6oC_hBLU_hjGJXriJ5Rd5eK3CnVUMQ>