[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1324047085.3429.5.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 15:51:25 +0100
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
Cc: Arend van Spriel <arend@...adcom.com>,
"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
John Linville <linville@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: unexpected taint message
On Fri, 2011-12-16 at 08:49 -0600, Larry Finger wrote:
> > + switch (flag) {
> > + case TAINT_CRAP:
> > + case TAINT_WARN:
> > + case TAINT_OOT_MODULE:
> > + break;
> > + default:
> > + if (__debug_locks_off())
> > + printk(KERN_WARNING
> > + "Disabling lock debugging due to kernel taint\n");
> > + }
> >
> > set_bit(flag,&tainted_mask);
> > }
>
> Yes. I like this patch a lot. Unfortunately, VirtualBox was a part of the
> decision to add the OOT taint. At least for that reason, this patch would not be
> accepted upstream. It is too bad that the Oracle people fought so hard to keep
> their module from setting TAINT_CRAP the way that GregKH wanted. That would have
> had fewer side effects for me.
I'm not sure -- I mean, it's one thing to identify OOT modules and
refuse to support them (and ignore lockdep reports with OOT set), but
it's another to just disable lockdep? I think?
johannes
--
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