From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261252AbTEETkK (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2003 15:40:10 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261255AbTEETkK (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2003 15:40:10 -0400 Received: from mailrelay2.lanl.gov ([128.165.4.103]:43943 "EHLO mailrelay2.lanl.gov") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261252AbTEETkI (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2003 15:40:08 -0400 Subject: Re: Kernel hot-swap using Kexec, BProc and CC/SMP Clusters. From: Steven Cole To: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu Cc: "Eric W. Biederman" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Larry McVoy , Linus Torvalds In-Reply-To: <200305051817.h45IHwJC003355@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> References: <1052140733.2163.93.camel@spc9.esa.lanl.gov> <1052157615.2163.113.camel@spc9.esa.lanl.gov> <200305051817.h45IHwJC003355@turing-police.cc.vt.edu> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1052164261.2166.129.camel@spc9.esa.lanl.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.4-1.1mdk Date: 05 May 2003 13:51:01 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2003-05-05 at 12:17, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu wrote: > On Mon, 05 May 2003 12:00:15 MDT, Steven Cole said: > > > Perhaps two uptimes could be kept. The current concept of uptime would > > remain as is, analogous to the reign of a king (the current kernel), and > > a new integrated uptime would be analogous to the life of a dynasty. The > > dynasty uptime would be one of the many things the new kernel learned > > about on booting. This new dynasty uptime could become quite long if > > everything keeps on ticking. > > Make sure you handle the case of a dynasty that starts on a 2.7.13 kernel > and is finally deposed by a power failure in 2.7.39. > 2.7.13 eh? Wow, that's optimistic. I guess Karim and others better get busy. Unless Linus throws in about 50 kernels with the -preX naming scheme like this last time. ;) Here's nice long uptime: tstad% uptime 12:58pm up 503 days, 1:30, 3 users, load average: 0.23, 0.04, 0.00 tstad% uname -a ULTRIX tstad 4.3 1 RISC I guess Ultrix didn't have a jiffie wraparound problem at 497 days. That DEC 5000/200 has run almost continuously for 12 years, except for the occasional palace revolution/forest fire fiasco. Steven