Re: HEADS UP: panic behaviour changed

[Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>]

    Date:        Sun, 1 Feb 2009 11:27:40 -0500
    From:        Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar%gmail.com@localhost>
    Message-ID:  
<1a69a9d80902010827i492f5f25j2e795470d12e4547%mail.gmail.com@localhost>

This (my comment) has nothing to do really with the previous topic of
this threat, but is kind of related ...

  | Nonetheless, I agree with the fact that release kernel must reboot on
  | panic without user intervention,

I have been wondering if perhaps ddb could simply cause a reboot if
entered, and then left unattended for some period (like 10 minutes),
with no commands at all - once any command was given it could assume a
human is in control and just act like it does now.

The period could perhaps be configurable - perhaps even change ddb.onpanic
so it sets the number of minutes to wait, with 0 implying don't wait at all,
(so don't bother entering ddb at all).   ('1' could be a special case meaning
10 or perhaps even infinite, so people who have ddb.onpanic=1 don't get too
short a time to react -1 might be better for infinite, but keeping compat
with what people have now is important).

In any case, some of the bad feeling that the drop to ddb leads to might
perhaps be alleviated if the system just waits a little, then reboots
if no-one does anything with ddb for a reasonable (or configurable) period.

kre