[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <451CDC31.6060407@goop.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 01:41:21 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: michael@...erman.id.au
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andi Kleen <ak@....de>, Hugh Dickens <hugh@...itas.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/4] Generic BUG handling.
Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> + printk(KERN_EMERG "------------[ cut here ]------------\n");
>>
>
> I'm not sure I'm big on the cut here marker.
>
x86 has it. I figured its more important to not change x86 output than
powerpc.
>> i386 implements CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE, but x86-64 and powerpc do
>> not. This should probably be made more consistent.
>>
>
> It looks like if you do this you _might_ be able to share struct
> bug_entry, or at least have consistent members for each arch. Which
> would eliminate some of the inlines you have for accessing the bug
> struct.
>
Yeah, its a bit of a toss-up. powerpc wants to hide the warn flag
somewhere, which either means having a different structure, or using the
fields differently. CONFIG_DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE supporters (ie, i386) want
to make the structure completely empty in the !DEBUG_BUGVERBOSE case
(which doesn't currently happen).
> It needed a bit of work to get going on powerpc:
>
Thanks. I'll try to fold all this together into a new patch when things
settle down.
J
-
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists