[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080307041940.GB19183@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 20:19:40 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
Cc: Jike Song <albcamus@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc4 rcupreempt.h WARNINGs while suspend/resume
On Fri, Mar 07, 2008 at 11:07:48AM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2008 at 12:27 AM, Paul E. McKenney
> <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 07:08:55PM +0800, Dave Young wrote:
> > > My syslog became a 2G size big file yestoday due to the warnings.
> > > How about change the WARN_ON to WARN_ON_ONCE?
> >
> > Hello, Dave,
> >
> > I might be convinced to make this change for 2.6.26, but the condition
> > that the WARN_ON() is complaining about is quite serious, so I don't
> > want to take a chance on it getting lost in the noise in the 2.6.25
> > series.
> >
> > Seem reasonable?
>
> IMHO, WARN_ON_ONCE is enough for my eyes :)
I could believe that, but my experience has been that many others
need the condition to be obvious...
> > Better yet, is there some sort of time-limited WARN_ON that kicks out
> > a message at most once per second or some such? Enough to definitely
> > be noticed, but not enough to bring the machine to its knees?
>
> Seems there's no such functions/macros, but is is really needed?
If everyone reports errors when they see isolated WARN_ON()s in their
logfiles, then no. But...
Thanx, Paul
--
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