[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100415073256.GG9240@elte.hu>
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:32:56 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: sfr@...b.auug.org.au, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com,
peterz@...radead.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fweisbec@...il.com,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: linux-next: PowerPC WARN_ON_ONCE() after merge of the final tree
(tip related)
* David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 08:49:40 +0200
>
> > Btw., WARN_ON trapping on PowerPC is clearly a PowerPC bug - there's a good
> > reason we have WARN_ON versus BUG_ON - it should be fixed.
>
> I disagree, an implementation should be allowed to use the most
> efficient implementation possible for both interfaces.
It trades robustness for slightly better space/code efficiency.
Such a trap based mechanism exists on x86 as well and we use it for BUG_ON().
We intentionally dont use it to generate warnings and dont override __WARN(),
because it would blow up way too often when a warning triggers in some
sensitive codepath that cannot take a trap.
Anyway, the warning obviously has to be fixed - but the boot crash itself is
PowerPC's own doing.
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists