[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100415231052.GA15570@nowhere>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 01:10:54 +0200
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@...onical.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Stop tracing on a schedule bug
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 01:01:50AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > I tend to think of the TRACE_EVENT_* as an indication of severity and
> > whether we want to stop the trace by default. From a distro
> > standpoint, the likelihood that we want to continue tracing after a
> > __schedule_bug is pretty low. It's easiest if we don't have to tell
>
> Well, scheduling while atomic is a BUG, but one of the category which
> allows the kernel to continue. So in fact it's treated like a WARN_ON.
> So the tracing_off_event() qualifier should be *_WARN.
>
> That's independent of the question whether you want to stop tracing in
> that very case
Exactly.
--
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