Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/panic: Add x86_panic_handler as default post-panic behavior

[Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao.osdev@gmail.com>]

Hello,

On 4/30/25 02:58, John Ogness wrote:
> On 2025-04-29, Carlos Bilbao <carlos.bilbao.osdev@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I see no reason why you don't just use safe_halt() as your panic
>>> handler.
>> Yes, in my original implementation I simply used halt, but I was
>> trying to be cautious in case any remaining messages hadn't flushed. I
>> wonder, can we be certain that, as you said, all output (e.g., a
>> backtrace) has already been displayed on screen at this point? I'm not
>> sure.
> Well, without this series, the kernel goes into an infinite loop. So if
> the messages are not all out, they won't magically appear during the
> infinite loop either.


I thought there may be some async stuff going on :)


>
> John


Thanks,

Carlos