linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dump

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, 31 Oct 2007 01:14:04 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dump_stack on panic

Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> writes:

> Is there any reason why we don't do a dump_stack on panic?

One (mostly psychological, but still serious) problem is that stack
dumps make panics always look like kernel bugs.  But there are panics
which are definitely not kernel bugs: like the popular cannot mount
root or machine checks or a couple of others.

We do not want users to send all these panics to linux-kernel
and they would if they look too much like kernel bugs.

I think it's in principle a good idea, but only if you
distingush the cases which are not kernel bugs.
e.g. use a different panic() call for them that does not dump.

-Andi
-
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/