linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] panic: Don't print redundant backtraces on oops

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <4EEF83AD.4010800@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Mon, 19 Dec 2011 10:34:21 -0800
From:	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:	holzheu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
CC:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] panic: Don't print redundant backtraces on oops


it?

> I think the two problems are not related. My problem was that only one
> CPU should execute panic. Andi's problem is that one (or more oops)
> messages are scrolled away by a subsequent panic.

Yes it's just for making panic less chatty.

> But I am not sure if Andi's patch solves all his problems. What e.g.
> about panic_on_oom? Don't we have the same problem here?

Yes, it only solves it for this specific -- but common -- case. Or at 
least it was a case
that annoyed me and prompted me to write the patch :)

I had a patch some time ago for a xpanic() where the caller could pass 
in additional
flags, including one to disable the backtrace. But that was a much 
larger patch,
this was a simpler alternative.

-Andi

--
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/