linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] eliminate spurious pointless 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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <20090312121928.GA15972@elte.hu>
Date:	Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:19:28 +0100
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] eliminate spurious pointless WARN_ON()s


* Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com> wrote:

> Namely during early boot, the panic() or BUG() paths may end 
> up in smp_call_function_*() with just a single online CPU. In 
> that situation the warnings generated are not only 
> meaningless, but also result in relevant output being 
> cluttered.
> 
> Therefore, defer the WARN_ON() checks until after the 
> (unaffected from the problem that is being attempted to be 
> detected here) cases have been handled.

Makes sense probably - but please send a patch against -tip as 
we've got quite many changes queued up in that area and your 
patch does not apply cleanly:

 patching file kernel/smp.c
 Hunk #1 FAILED at 222.
 Hunk #2 FAILED at 229.
 Hunk #3 FAILED at 325.
 Hunk #4 FAILED at 344.
 4 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- rejects in file kernel/smp.c

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/