Re: [PATCH 0/4] vmcore-tasks: export per-task metadata to vmcoreinfo
Mike Rapoport <[email protected]> Mon, 20 Jul 2026 15:43:11 +0300
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-mips,org.infradead.lists.kexec,org.infradead.lists.linux-riscv,org.kernel.vger.linux-doc,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Simon, On Mon, Jul 20, 2026 at 10:19:27AM +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 09:21:58AM +0300, Mike Rapoport wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 12:14:26AM +0300, Pnina Feder wrote: > > > This series extends vmcoreinfo with struct offsets and sizes needed by > > > the vmcore-tasks userspace tool to extract per-task state from a vmcore > > > dump without requiring kernel debug symbols (DWARF/BTF). > > > > > > The vmcore-tasks tool reads /proc/vmcore (or a saved vmcore file) and > > > reconstructs, for each task: > > > - task name, pid, state, flags > > > - VMA list (start, end, flags, backing file) > > > - user register state (saved on the kernel stack at kernel entry) > > > - user-space backtrace with VMA/filename mapping > > > - kernel dmesg buffer > > > > > > This provides a lightweight post-mortem crash analysis capability for > > > production environments where full debug info (DWARF/BTF) is not > > > available. > > > > > > The companion userspace tool is submitted to kexec-tools: > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ > > > > Sorry for the delay, this fell between the cracks somehow. > > > > The kernel side looks fine overall, but to merge it there should be an > > agreement from the userspace side maintainers that vmcore-tasks is > > something they are wishing to accept. > > Hi Mike, all, > > Sorry for the extended delay. > > I will send some minor feedback to the user-space tool patchset > but overall, yes, this is something I would be happy to accept. > > I don't want to create a chicken-and-egg type problem here. > But it's probably worth mentioning that usually features > hit the kernel before the corresponding code is accepted > into kexec-tools. Sorry if I wasn't clear. I didn't mean that the feature should be merged into kexec-tools before merging the kernel bits. I just wanted to make sure there's no fundamental issue from kexec-tools perspective. > Let me know how you would like to proceed. I'm going to wait for Baoquan's review and once that's done I'll pick up the kernel bits. -- Sincerely yours, Mike.