linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix generic WARN

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 25 Oct 2006 12:04:05 +0200
From:	Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc:	Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix generic WARN_ON message

Hi!

> * Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org> wrote:
> 
> > A warning is a warning, not a BUG.
> 
> > -		printk("BUG: warning at %s:%d/%s()\n", __FILE__,	\
> > +		printk("WARNING at %s:%d %s()\n", __FILE__,	\
> 
> i'm not really happy about this change.
> 
> Firstly, most WARN_ON()s are /bugs/, not warnings ... If it's a real 
> warning, a KERN_INFO printk should be done.
> 
> Secondly, the reason i changed it to the 'BUG: ...' format is that i 
> tried to make it easier for automated tools (and for users) to figure 
> out that a kernel bug happened.

Well... but the message is really bad. It leads to users telling us "I
hit BUG in kernel"...
								Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/